Using a risk assessment matrix with mental health patients in emergency departments

2005 ◽  
Vol 12 (9) ◽  
pp. 21-28 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chris Hart ◽  
Rachael Colley ◽  
Anthony Harrison
2011 ◽  
Vol 23 (6) ◽  
pp. 677-688 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tracey J Weiland ◽  
Claire Mackinlay ◽  
Nicole Hill ◽  
Marie F Gerdtz ◽  
George A Jelinek

2016 ◽  
Vol 61 (15) ◽  
pp. 1682-1700 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alex Kigerl ◽  
Zachary Hamilton

There is a growing need in Washington to triage patients being considered for inpatient treatment. There has previously been no risk assessment normed to persons with mental illness in the State of Washington. The Static Risk Assessment (SRA) is used in Washington to assess risk among offenders under State Department of Corrections supervision. The present study sought to create and validate a new risk assessment, the SRA for Mental Health Patients (SRA-MHP), for two mental health populations in Washington. A sample of 16,289 patients involuntarily committed due to being deemed dangerous or gravely disabled, as well as a sample of 8,713 forensic patients undergoing a competency evaluation to stand trial after being charged with a crime, was gathered to assess the utility in applying the SRA-MHP to persons with mental illness. Results indicate that the SRA-MHP has high predictive performance for these samples.


2017 ◽  
Vol 70 (2) ◽  
pp. 193-202.e16 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark D. Pearlmutter ◽  
Kristin H. Dwyer ◽  
Laura G. Burke ◽  
Niels Rathlev ◽  
Louise Maranda ◽  
...  

2009 ◽  
Vol 26 (1) ◽  
pp. 11-14 ◽  
Author(s):  
A S Patel ◽  
A Harrison ◽  
W Bruce-Jones

2015 ◽  
Vol 27 (6) ◽  
pp. 529-536 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter Alarcon Manchego ◽  
Jonathan Knott ◽  
Andis Graudins ◽  
Bruce Bartley ◽  
Biswadev Mitra

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sandra Oziel

Assessing and managing level of risk among forensic mental health patients is a primary role of clinical forensic psychologists. Forensic assessments are focused on risk factors and deficits, whereas patient strengths and protective factors are either partially included or overlooked altogether by forensic psychologists. As a result, less is known about protective factors in general and how they may serve to inform risk management practices. The Structured Assessment of Protective Factors for Violence Risk (SAPROF) is the first tool to exclusively rely on protective factors and was investigated for the current study. The psychometric properties of the SAPROF were examined using a sample of 50 Canadian patients found Not Criminally Responsible (NCR) at a psychiatric hospital using both file information and semi-structured interviews. Outcome variables included risk management decisions (change in privilege level and security level) and indicators of recidivism (psychiatric medication administration, institutional misconduct and disposition breaches). The study found some evidence for intrarater and interrater reliability, construct validity, predictive validity and incremental predictive validity. The SAPROF approached significance for adding incremental predictive validity to the HCR-20 V3, a measure of violence risk, for disposition breaches and institutional misconduct, and effect sizes doubled. Given that the addition of the SAPROF increased the accuracy of the violence risk assessment, there are considerable implications for informing clinical practice. Implications for risk assessment, treatment planning, intervention and risk management decisions implemented by review boards and clinical practitioners are discussed. It is recommended that the SAPROF be added as an adjunct measure to risk assessment batteries and included in hospital reports, given that it predicted several patient behaviours.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document