Search results

Low security is a poorly understood concept, particularly in relation to people with an intellectual disability. Characteristics of patients offered an admission to low secure intellectual disability settings have not been robustly demonstrated. The same applies to staff perceptions of low security. The aims of the study were to ascertain the characteristics of patients referred to a low secure intellectual disability unit which lead to an offer of admission, identify the views of staff working on the unit on the concept of low security, and use both sets of data to discuss low secure provision for people with intellectual disability. A case‐controlled study was carried out for 33 patients referred to the unit over 42 months. The characteristics of 18 patients offered an admission were compared with those of 15 patients not offered an admission, and five of the staff working on the unit were interviewed about the concept of low security. Patients offered an admission were more able than those not offered an admission, posed more risks and were more complex diagnostically. Staff working on the unit agreed that their patients were complex, but felt that they were appropriately placed overall. The challenges of low secure provision were discussed by staff. Patients sampled were complex and heterogeneous, but not necessarily ‘forensic’. Their complexity requires sophisticated care plans and management strategies. This study has implications for referrers, staff, patients and managers, and highlights areas for future research.

There are few reliable psychometric measures of the psychopathology of offenders with intellectual disabilities (ID). However, previous research has indicated that the emotional problems scale (EPS) is useful in identifying a range of treatment needs and in predicting risk to self and others. The purpose of this paper is to compare the severity of the emotional and behavioural problems of a small sample of offenders with ID in medium and low secure services, as assessed by EPS. Additionally, the data are tentatively compared with those reported in previous research to precipitate discussion regarding the changes in clinical populations in secure care over time.

The study collected demographic and EPS data for patients with ID (n=25) on medium secure and a low secure wards. Data were collected as part of routine clinical practice, with EPS forms being completed by nursing and other multi-disciplinary staff.

It was found that there was no statistically significant difference in EPS scores between medium and low secure patients with ID. The authors also highlight differences between the current sample and the normative data collected by previous research.

The data regarding the psychopathology of medium and low secure patients with ID provide insight into the ever changing resourcing needs and risk profiles of this complex patient group. In addition, there is a dearth of empirical research that comments on the clinical differences observed over time in forensic populations. As the current data differ from pre-existing normative data, the potential shift in populations and also implications for the accuracy of clinical decision making based on the assessment are discussed.

This study reports a recovery‐themed cognitive behavioural educational group for clients suffering from chronic positive and negative symptoms of schizophrenia, on a low secure inpatient unit. Nine participants completed baseline and post‐intervention measures of insight, self‐esteem and knowledge about schizophrenia. Additional post‐intervention measures included compliance with medication, feelings about schizophrenia, qualitative views and access to the community. Overall, the results were positive within the limits of this small‐scale study. Following the intervention, most participants reported that they were less frightened about psychosis, and felt more in control of their illness and more optimistic about their future. This study suggests that there may be clinical benefits of having CBT‐orientated educational groups in low secure settings with clients with longstanding co‐existing positive and negative symptoms of schizophrenia. Recovery style should be evaluated systematically in future studies.

The aim of the project was to evaluate the short‐term treatment outcomes of patients treated in a medium secure service for people with intellectual disability. A total of 138 patients, 77 discharged and 61 current inpatients, treated over a six‐year period were included in the audit. Information on demographic and clinical variables was collected on a pre‐designed data collection tool and analysed using appropriate statistical methods. The median length of stay for the discharged group was 2.8 years. About 90% of this group were discharged to lower levels of security and about a third went directly to community placements. None of the clinical and forensic factors examined was significantly associated with length of stay for this group. There was a ‘difficult to discharge long‐stay’ group which had more patients with criminal sections, restriction orders, history of abuse, fire setting, personality disorders and substance misuse. However, when regression analysis was done, most of these factors were not predictive of the length of stay. Clinical diagnosis or offending behaviour categories are poor predictors of length of hospital stay, and there is a need to identify empirically derived patient clusters using a variety of clinical and forensic variables. Common datasets and multi‐centre audits are needed to drive this.

The purpose of this paper is to complete a thorough needs assessment that would enable the development of a robust pathway of care for adults with a learning disability requiring secure care, and to assist commissioners to make informed planning decisions.

The paper identified people with a learning disability originating from London who were in secure care, and collected data about them. The paper used reference groups to inform the analysis.

The paper identified 249 people in secure services and was able to include 136 patients in the analysis. In all, 64 were in NHS provision and 72 in independent sector provision; 109 (80.1 per cent) were male and 27 (19.9 per cent) female; on average, patients were cared for 61.5 miles away from their homes; NHS patients were far closer to home; 69.1 per cent had a mild learning disability; 82.3 per cent had a history of violence; approximately one in six patients could not progress due to a lack of an appropriate ward, facility, resource and/or intervention.

Secure care for this population is a major public health issue. Many are placed a long way from home. Local services should be developed, and there should be sufficiently robust “step down” places for patients to be discharged to.

Systematic identification of the needs of a marginalised group to enable better more appropriate care pathways to be developed in the future.

The purpose of this paper is to describe how aggressive and violent incidents differ across specialist gender, security and mental health/learning disability pathways in specialist secure care.

The paper uses a retrospective survey of routinely collected incident data from one 207‐bed UK independent sector provider of specialist medium and low secure mental health care for male and female adults with primary diagnosis of mental illness or intellectual disability.

In total, 3,133 incidents involving 184/373 (49.3 per cent) patients were recorded (68.2 per cent other‐directed aggression, 31.8 per cent self‐harm). Most incidents occurred in the medium secure wards but more than half of the most severely rated self‐harm incidents occurred in low security. Men were disproportionately involved in incidents, but a small number of women were persistently involved in multiple acts. Incidents were most common in the intellectual disability pathway.

Incidents, especially those of lower severity, can be under‐reported in routine practice. Information about incident severity was limited.

Aggressive incidents do not occur homogenously across forensic and secure mental health services but differ substantially in their frequency and nature across security levels, and gender and mental health/intellectual disability pathways. Different approaches to training and management are required to ensure appropriate prevention and intervention. Future practice should draw on emerging theories of differential susceptibility.

This paper extends current knowledge about how incidents of violence and aggression differ across secure settings.

There is not only an absence of guidelines for the development of medium and low secure units but also confusion over the definitions of these types of provision.

There are high levels of psychiatric morbidity amongst people in prisons. In England and Wales, prisoners who present with the most acute mental health needs can be transferred to hospital urgently under part III of the Mental Health Act 1983. This project reviewed all such transfers within one region of England, with an emphasis on differences across levels of security.

Over a six-year period (2010–2016) within one region of England, 930 psychiatric referrals were received from seven male prisons. From these referrals, 173 (18.5%) secure hospital transfers were required. Diagnostic and basic demographic information were analysed, along with hospital security categorisation (high secure, medium secure, low secure, psychiatric intensive care unit and other) and total time to transfer in days.

There were substantial delays to urgent hospital transfer across all levels of hospital security. Prisoners were transferred to the following units: medium security (n = 98, 56.9%); psychiatric intensive care units (PICUs) (n = 34, 19.7%); low secure conditions (n = 20, 11.6%); high secure conditions (n = 12, 6.9%); other (n = 9, 5.2%). Mean transfer times were as follows: high secure = 159.6 days; other = 68.8 days; medium secure = 58.6 days; low secure = 54.8 days; and psychiatric intensive care = 16.1 days.

In keeping with the wider literature in this area, transfers of prisoners to hospital were very delayed across all levels of secure psychiatric hospital care. Mean transfer times were in breach of the national 14-day timescale, although transfers to PICUs were quicker than to other units. National work, including research and service pilots, is required to understand whether and how these transfer times might be improved.

This paper extends the available literature on the topic of transferring prisoners with mental illness who require compulsory treatment. There is a small but developing literature in this area, and this paper largely confirms that delays to hospital transfer remain a serious problem in England and Wales. National work, including research and service pilots, is required to understand whether and how these transfer times might be improved. This could include different referral and transfer models as a component of service-based and pathways research or combining referral pathways across units to improve their efficacy.

In this study we demonstrate how the Health of the Nation Outcomes Scales for secure and forensic service users (HoNOS‐secure) tracks risk and recovery in men with mental illness and men with learning disability in a secure care pathway. Total and individual HoNOS‐secure item ratings made by multi‐disciplinary teams across the course of a period of admission (mean 15 months) for 180 men were examined. There was significant positive change on the clinical and risk‐related scales of HoNOS‐secure for patients in the learning disability care pathway (N = 48) between initial and final ratings. In the mental health care pathway (N = 132 patients) an apparent lack of change masked a more complex picture, where initial decline in HoNOS‐secure ratings was succeeded by significant improvement. Results suggest that it is challenging to measure clinical and risk‐related medium‐term clinical outcomes objectively for these patients, particularly in relation to core issues of treatment of mental disorder, and reduction of both problem behaviour and risk to others. However, it is important that practitioners continue to strive to demonstrate the benefits of care and treatment through appropriate outcomes measures.

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.