26
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Patient outcomes following discharge from secure psychiatric hospitals: systematic review and meta-analysis

      review-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Secure hospitals are a high-cost, low-volume service consuming around a fifth of the overall mental health budget in England and Wales.

          Aims

          A systematic review and meta-analysis of adverse outcomes after discharge along with a comparison with rates in other clinical and forensic groups in order to inform public health and policy.

          Method

          We searched for primary studies that followed patients discharged from a secure hospital, and reported mortality, readmissions or reconvictions. We determined crude rates for all adverse outcomes.

          Results

          In total, 35 studies from 10 countries were included, involving 12 056 patients out of which 53% were violent offenders. The crude death rate for all-cause mortality was 1538 per 100 000 person-years (95% CI 1175–1901). For suicide, the crude death rate was 325 per 100 000 person-years (95% CI 235–415). The readmission rate was 7208 per 100 000 person-years (95% CI 5916–8500). Crude reoffending rates were 4484 per 100 000 person-years (95% CI 3679–5287), with lower rates in more recent studies.

          Conclusions

          There is some evidence that patients discharged from forensic psychiatric services have lower offending outcomes than many comparative groups. Services could consider improving interventions aimed at reducing premature mortality, particularly suicide, in discharged patients.

          Related collections

          Most cited references30

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          A behavioral weight-loss intervention in persons with serious mental illness.

          Overweight and obesity are epidemic among persons with serious mental illness, yet weight-loss trials systematically exclude this vulnerable population. Lifestyle interventions require adaptation in this group because psychiatric symptoms and cognitive impairment are highly prevalent. Our objective was to determine the effectiveness of an 18-month tailored behavioral weight-loss intervention in adults with serious mental illness. We recruited overweight or obese adults from 10 community psychiatric rehabilitation outpatient programs and randomly assigned them to an intervention or a control group. Participants in the intervention group received tailored group and individual weight-management sessions and group exercise sessions. Weight change was assessed at 6, 12, and 18 months. Of 291 participants who underwent randomization, 58.1% had schizophrenia or a schizoaffective disorder, 22.0% had bipolar disorder, and 12.0% had major depression. At baseline, the mean body-mass index (the weight in kilograms divided by the square of the height in meters) was 36.3, and the mean weight was 102.7 kg (225.9 lb). Data on weight at 18 months were obtained from 279 participants. Weight loss in the intervention group increased progressively over the 18-month study period and differed significantly from the control group at each follow-up visit. At 18 months, the mean between-group difference in weight (change in intervention group minus change in control group) was -3.2 kg (-7.0 lb, P=0.002); 37.8% of the participants in the intervention group lost 5% or more of their initial weight, as compared with 22.7% of those in the control group (P=0.009). There were no significant between-group differences in adverse events. A behavioral weight-loss intervention significantly reduced weight over a period of 18 months in overweight and obese adults with serious mental illness. Given the epidemic of obesity and weight-related disease among persons with serious mental illness, our findings support implementation of targeted behavioral weight-loss interventions in this high-risk population. (Funded by the National Institute of Mental Health; ACHIEVE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00902694.).
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            The high prevalence of poor physical health and unhealthy lifestyle behaviours in individuals with severe mental illness.

            Recent mental health care policy has addressed the need for health care professionals to consider the physical health of consumers. Mental health nurses are particularly well-placed for this role. To provide mental health nurses with practical information, this narrative review summarises evidence from recent research on the physical health of individuals with Serious Mental Illness (SMI). In those with SMI, the international prevalence of obesity, the metabolic syndrome, diabetes mellitus, symptoms of cardiovascular disease, and respiratory disease all exceed that of the general population by at least two times, and HIV prevalence may be increased by as much as eight times. This increased prevalence of chronic disease may be largely responsible for an increased risk of death of up to five times, resulting in as much as 30 years of potential life lost. Of particular concern, the recent evidence suggests that for physical health and increased mortality, the gap between individuals with SMI and the general population is worsening. Unhealthy lifestyle behaviours undoubtedly play a role in the development of poor physical health and chronic disease, and the present review indicates that low physical activity, poor diet, smoking, alcohol and substance abuse, and risky sexual behaviour are common in individuals with SMI. This narrative review demonstrates that the prevalence of poor physical health and health behaviours in people with SMI far exceed that observed in the general population, and reinforces the urgent need for mental health nurses to address physical health concerns in patients.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Use of risk assessment instruments to predict violence and antisocial behaviour in 73 samples involving 24 827 people: systematic review and meta-analysis

              Objective To investigate the predictive validity of tools commonly used to assess the risk of violence, sexual, and criminal behaviour. Design Systematic review and tabular meta-analysis of replication studies following PRISMA guidelines. Data sources PsycINFO, Embase, Medline, and United States Criminal Justice Reference Service Abstracts. Review methods We included replication studies from 1 January 1995 to 1 January 2011 if they provided contingency data for the offending outcome that the tools were designed to predict. We calculated the diagnostic odds ratio, sensitivity, specificity, area under the curve, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, the number needed to detain to prevent one offence, as well as a novel performance indicator—the number safely discharged. We investigated potential sources of heterogeneity using metaregression and subgroup analyses. Results Risk assessments were conducted on 73 samples comprising 24 847 participants from 13 countries, of whom 5879 (23.7%) offended over an average of 49.6 months. When used to predict violent offending, risk assessment tools produced low to moderate positive predictive values (median 41%, interquartile range 27-60%) and higher negative predictive values (91%, 81-95%), and a corresponding median number needed to detain of 2 (2-4) and number safely discharged of 10 (4-18). Instruments designed to predict violent offending performed better than those aimed at predicting sexual or general crime. Conclusions Although risk assessment tools are widely used in clinical and criminal justice settings, their predictive accuracy varies depending on how they are used. They seem to identify low risk individuals with high levels of accuracy, but their use as sole determinants of detention, sentencing, and release is not supported by the current evidence. Further research is needed to examine their contribution to treatment and management.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Br J Psychiatry
                Br J Psychiatry
                bjprcpsych
                The British Journal of Psychiatry
                Royal College of Psychiatrists
                0007-1250
                1472-1465
                January 2016
                January 2016
                : 208
                : 1
                : 17-25
                Affiliations
                Seena Fazel, MD, Zuzanna Fimińska, MSc, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK; Christopher Cocks, MD, Department of Psychiatry, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia; Jeremy Coid, MD, Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine, Queen Mary University London, London, UK
                Author notes
                Correspondence: Seena Fazel, Department of Psychiatry, University of Oxford, Warneford Hospital, Oxford OX3 7JX. UK. Email: seena.fazel@ 123456psych.ox.ac.uk
                Article
                10.1192/bjp.bp.114.149997
                4698562
                26729842
                6aaeca44-cd8c-4ec0-811b-fb74b508307c
                © The Royal College of Psychiatrists 2016.

                This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) licence.

                History
                : 14 April 2014
                : 18 December 2014
                : 25 February 2015
                Funding
                Funded by: Wellcome Trust Senior Research Fellowship in Clinical Science
                Award ID: 095806
                Award Recipient :
                Categories
                Review Articles

                Clinical Psychology & Psychiatry
                Clinical Psychology & Psychiatry

                Comments

                Comment on this article