Search results

This paper aims to illustrate by means of a case study how HKT-R Spider reference profiles of recidivists and non-recidivists may be supportive in leave decisions.

The authors describe what is known for recidivists and non-recidivists about changes in risk factors during treatment. The HKT-R Spider is introduced. By comparing a case study to group profiles, the authors illustrate how discussions about leave may be rationalised. From a study among 278 patients to explore the profiles, the authors report the inter agreement, and differences between recidivists and non-recidivists of the clinical HKT-R factors. Intra correlation coefficients, Wilcoxon signed ranks test and independent and paired t-tests are applied. To explore which combination of factors are discriminating between both groups, the authors also performed logistic regression analyses at six treatment stages.

The inter agreement reliability and internal consistency of the clinical HKT-R scale were acceptable to good in all six stages studied. The HKT-R Spider and profiles can be used to assist in evidence-informed decision-making about leave.

Globally recidivists had somewhat higher levels of clinical risk factors at all six decision moments, but the interpretation of HKT-R Spiders profiles should always be adapted to the individual’s context.

Applying the HKT-R Spider reference profiles on individual cases may structure and rationalize discussions lead to decisions based on clinical facts.

The current review aims to focus on how risk and protective factors for self-harm in secure mental health hospitals are captured in the literature.

Fifty-seven articles were included in a systematic review, drawn from an initial 1,119 articles, post duplicate removal. Databases included Psycinfo, Psycarticles, Psycnet, Web of Science and EBSCO host. A thematic analysis was used, which included a meta-ethnographic approach for considering qualitative papers.

There was a clear focus on risk factors, with eight identified (in order of occurrence): raised emotional reactivity and poor emotion regulation; poor mental health; traumatic experiences; personality disorder diagnosis and associated traits; increased use of outward aggression – dual harm; constraints of a secure environment and lack of control; previous self-harm and suicide attempts; and hopelessness. Protective factors featured less, resulting in only three themes emerging (in order of occurrence): positive social support and communication; positive coping skills; and hope/positive outlook.

This includes a proposal to move focus away from “risk” factors, to incorporate “needs”, in terms of individual and environmental factors. There is also a need for more attention to focus on developing high quality research in this area.

The research captures an area where a synthesis of research has not been comprehensively undertaken, particularly with regards to capturing protective as well as risk factors.