scholarly journals Outcome Measures in Forensic Mental Health Services: A Systematic Review of Instruments and Qualitative Evidence Synthesis

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-40
Author(s):  
Howard Ryland ◽  
Jonathan Cook ◽  
Denis Yukhnenko ◽  
Ray Fitzpatrick ◽  
Seena Fazel
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Mental Health Services ◽  
Health Services ◽  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Evidence Synthesis ◽  
Qualitative Evidence Synthesis ◽  
Forensic Mental Health ◽  
Qualitative Evidence

scholarly journals Personal recovery and its challenges in forensic mental health: systematic review and thematic synthesis of the qualitative literature

BJPsych Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Mette Senneseth ◽  
Charlotte Pollak ◽  
Ragnar Urheim ◽  
Caroline Logan ◽  
Tom Palmstierna
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Mental Health Services ◽  
Health Services ◽  
Recovery Process ◽  
Forensic Mental Health ◽  
Personal Recovery ◽  
Thematic Synthesis ◽  
Recovery Processes ◽  
Qualitative Literature

Background There has been a call for a framework to guide recovery-oriented practices in forensic mental health services. Aims This study aims to examine personal recovery and its challenges in forensic mental health settings in relation to the established framework for personal recovery in mental illness: connectedness, hope, identity, meaning and empowerment (CHIME). Method This study is an updated and expanded systematic review and thematic synthesis of the qualitative literature. A systematic search of six electronic databases (Web of Science, Medline, PsycINFO, CINAHL, EMBASE and SocIndex) was carried out in January 2019, using the terms [Recover*] AND [Forensic OR Secure] AND [Patient* OR Offend* OR Service User*]. Only studies that included service user's own perceptions and were published from 2014 onward were included in the review. Data were examined with thematic synthesis and subsequently analysed in relation to the CHIME framework. Results Twenty-one studies were included in the review. Findings suggest that some adjustments to the original CHIME framework are needed for it to be more relevant to forensic populations, and that an additional recovery process regarding feeling safe and being secure (safety and security) could be added to CHIME, providing the CHIME-Secure framework (CHIME-S). Specific challenges and barriers for forensic recovery were identified and found to represent the opposite of the recovery processes defined by CHIME (e.g. hopelessness). Conclusions We present the CHIME-S as a framework for the personal recovery processes of forensic mental health service users. The CHIME-S may guide the recovery-oriented work of forensic mental health services.

scholarly journals Objective predictors of outcome in forensic mental health services—a systematic review

CNS Spectrums ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 21 (6) ◽  
pp. 430-444 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ottilie Sedgwick ◽  
Susan Young ◽  
Mrigendra Das ◽  
Veena Kumari
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Mental Health Services ◽  
Length Of Stay ◽  
Health Services ◽  
Clinical Judgment ◽  
Poor Performance ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Forensic Mental Health ◽  
Predictors Of Outcome

This systematic review aimed to examine whether neurobiological methods, or other methods independent of clinical judgment, have been investigated to assist decision making in forensic mental health services and, if so, whether this may be a useful strategy for predicting outcomes. OVID-Medline, Embase, and PsychInfo (inception–January 2015) were searched, limiting to English and human studies, using terms relating to “predict,” “outcome,” “psychiatry,” and “forensic” to identify primary research articles reporting on predictors of outcome in forensic mental health services not reliant on clinical judgment/self-report. Fifty studies investigating demographic, neuropsychological/neurophysiological, and biological predictors were identified, reporting on 3 broad outcomes: (i) inpatient violence, (ii) length of stay, (iii) reoffending. Factors associated positively, negatively, and showing no relationship with each outcome were extracted and compiled across studies. Of various demographic predictors examined, the most consistent associations were between previous psychiatric admissions and inpatient violence; a more “severe” offense and a longer length of stay; and young age and reoffending. Poor performance on tests of cognitive control and social cognition predicted inpatient violence while a neurophysiological measure of impulsivity showed utility predicting reoffending. Serum cholesterol and creatine kinase emerged as biological factors with potential to predict future inpatient violence. Research in this field is in its infancy, but investigations conducted to date indicate that using objective markers is a promising strategy to predict clinically significant outcomes.

Making sense of child and adolescent mental health services (CAMHS): An audit of the referral journey and the use of routine outcome measures (ROMS)

2021 ◽  
pp. 135910452199970
Author(s):  
Naomi Gibbons ◽  
Emma Harrison ◽  
Paul Stallard
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Mental Health Services ◽  
Health Services ◽  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Adolescent Mental Health ◽  
Child And Adolescent ◽  
Completion Rates ◽  
Making Sense ◽  
North East ◽  
Over Time

Background: There is increased emphasis on the national reporting of Routine Outcome Measures (ROMS) as a way of improving Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services (CAMHS). This data needs to be viewed in context so that reasons for outcome completion rates are understood and monitored over time. Method: We undertook an in-depth prospective audit of consecutive referrals accepted into the Bath and North East Somerset, Swindon and Wiltshire (BSW) CAMHS service from November 2017 to January 2018 ( n = 1074) and April to September 2019 ( n = 1172). Results: Across both audits 90% of those offered an appointment were seen with three quarters completing baseline ROMS. One in three were not seen again with around 30% still being open to the service at the end of each audit. Of those closed to the service, paired ROMS were obtained for 46% to 60% of cases. There were few changes in referral problems or complexity factors over time. Conclusion: Understanding the referral journey and the reasons for attrition will help to put nationally collected data in context and can inform and monitor service transformation over time.

scholarly journals Study protocol of a systematic review and qualitative evidence synthesis using two different approaches: Healthcare related needs and desires of older people with post-stroke aphasia

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (4) ◽  
pp. e039348
Author(s):  
Nadine Janis Pohontsch ◽  
Thorsten Meyer ◽  
Yvonne Eisenmann ◽  
Maria-Inti Metzendorf ◽  
Verena Leve ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Older People ◽  
Evidence Synthesis ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Research Question ◽  
Treatment Success ◽  
Qualitative Studies ◽  
Qualitative Evidence Synthesis ◽  
Healthcare Needs ◽  
Qualitative Evidence

IntroductionStroke is a frequent disease in the older population of Western Europe with aphasia as a common consequence. Aphasia is known to impede targeting treatment to individual patients’ needs and therefore may reduce treatment success. In Germany, the postacute care of patients who had stroke is provided by different healthcare institutions of different sectors (rehabilitation, nursing and primary care) with substantial difficulties to coordinate services. We will conduct two qualitative evidence syntheses (QESs) aiming at exploring distinct healthcare needs and desires of older people living with poststroke aphasia. We thereby hope to support the development of integrated care models based on needs of patients who are very restricted to communicate them. Since various methods of QESs exist, the aim of the study embedding the two QESs was to determine if findings differ according to the approach used.Methods and analysisWe will conduct two QESs by using metaethnography (ME) and thematic synthesis (ThS) independently to synthesise the findings of primary qualitative studies. The main differences between these two methods are the underlying epistemologies (idealism (ME) vs realism (ThS)) and the type of research question (emerging (ME) vs fixed (ThS)).We will search seven bibliographical databases. Inclusion criteria comprise: patients with poststroke aphasia, aged 65 years and older, studies in German/English, all types of qualitative studies concerning needs and desires related to healthcare or the healthcare system. The protocol was registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews, follows Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols guidelines and includes three items from the Enhancing Transparency in Reporting the synthesis of Qualitative Research checklist.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval is not required. Findings will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and presented on national conferences.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document