Security needs among patients referred for high secure care in Broadmoor Hospital England

Hannah Kate Williams, Madhri Senanayke, Callum C Ross, Rob Bates, Mary Davoren, Hannah Kate Williams, Madhri Senanayke, Callum C Ross, Rob Bates, Mary Davoren

Abstract

Background: Security needs among patients referred to forensic mental health services have rarely been systematically studied.

Aims: To ascertain security needs among patients referred to a high secure hospital, Broadmoor High Secure Hospital, England. We also aimed to compare the security needs for those referred to mental illness services with those referred to personality disorder services in the hospital.

Method: A retrospective complete cohort study of all referrals to Broadmoor Hospital over a 2-year period was conducted. All referred patients (n = 204) were assessed for need for high secure care by two Broadmoor clinicians. The final decision on need for admission was taken by a multidisciplinary admission panel. Independent of the panel, researchers rated need for security using the DUNDRUM-1 triage security scale.

Results: Those admitted to Broadmoor Hospital had higher triage security scores than those declined (F = 4.209, d.f. = 1, P = 0.042). Referrals to the personality disorder pathway had higher security needs than those referred to the mental illness pathway high secure service (F = 6.9835, d.f. = 1, P = 0.0089). Overall security needs among referrals to Broadmoor were extremely high, both by comparison with previous needs identified in UK medium secure services and international medium and high secure services.

Conclusions: High secure patient cohorts represent a uniquely vulnerable group within mental health services, with extremely high security needs identified in this study. This has significant implications for services given the high levels of resources needed to provide therapeutically safe and secure care and treatment to this group.

Keywords: Forensic psychiatry; high security; needs assessment; risk assessment; therapeutic security.

Conflict of interest statement

Supplementary material

References

    1. Duke L H, Furtado V, Guo B, Vollm BA. Long-stay in forensic-psychiatric care in the UK. Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol 2018; 53: 313–21.
    1. Rutherford M, Duggan S. Forensic Mental Health Services: Facts And Figures On Current Provision. Sainsbury Centre for Mental Health, 2007.
    1. Coid J, Kahtan N, Gault S, Cook A, Jarman B. Medium secure forensic psychiatry services: comparison of seven English health regions. Br J Psychiatry 2001; 178: 55–61.
    1. McCrone P. Paying the Price: The Cost of Mental Health Care in England to 2026. King's Fund, 2008.
    1. Kennedy HG. Therapeutic uses of security: mapping forensic mental health services by stratifying risk. Adv Psychiatr Treat 2002; 8: 433–43.
    1. Brown CS, Lloyd K. OPRISK: a structured checklist assessing security needs for mentally disordered offenders referred to high security psychiatric hospital. Crim Behav Ment Health 2008; 18: 190–202.
    1. Office H, Health Do, Security S. Report of the Committee on Mentally Abnormal Offenders. HMSO, 1975.
    1. Kennedy H, O'Neill C, Flynn G, Gill P, Davoren M. The DUNDRUM toolkit draft V1. 0.30. Trinity College Dublin, 2016.
    1. Flynn G, O'Neill C, McInerney C, Kennedy HG. The DUNDRUM-1 structured professional judgment for triage to appropriate levels of therapeutic security: retrospective-cohort validation study. BMC Psychiatry 2011; 11: 43.
    1. Flynn G, O'Neill C, Kennedy HG. DUNDRUM-2: prospective validation of a structured professional judgment instrument assessing priority for admission from the waiting list for a forensic mental health hospital. BMC Res Notes 2011; 4: 230.
    1. Davoren M, O'Dwyer S, Abidin Z, Naughton L, Gibbons O, Doyle E, et al. Prospective in-patient cohort study of moves between levels of therapeutic security: the DUNDRUM-1 triage security, DUNDRUM-3 programme completion and DUNDRUM-4 recovery scales and the HCR-20. BMC Psychiatry 2012; 12: 80.
    1. Davoren M, Abidin Z, Naughton L, Gibbons O, Nulty A, Wright B, et al. Prospective study of factors influencing conditional discharge from a forensic hospital: the DUNDRUM-3 programme completion and DUNDRUM-4 recovery structured professional judgement instruments and risk. BMC Psychiatry 2013; 13: 185.
    1. Davoren M, Hennessy S, Conway C, Marrinan S, Gill P, Kennedy HG. Recovery and concordance in a secure forensic psychiatry hospital - the self rated DUNDRUM-3 programme completion and DUNDRUM-4 recovery scales. BMC Psychiatry 2015; 15: 61.
    1. O'Dwyer S, Davoren M, Abidin Z, Doyle E, McDonnell K, Kennedy HG. The DUNDRUM Quartet: validation of structured professional judgement instruments DUNDRUM-3 assessment of programme completion and DUNDRUM-4 assessment of recovery in forensic mental health services. BMC Res Notes 2011; 4: 229.
    1. Freestone M, Bull D, Brown R, Boast N, Blazey F, Gilluley P. Triage, decision-making and follow-up of patients referred to a UK forensic service: validation of the DUNDRUM toolkit. BMC Psychiatry 2015; 15: 239.
    1. Adams J, Thomas SD, Mackinnon T, Eggleton D. The risks, needs and stages of recovery of a complete forensic patient cohort in an Australian state. BMC Psychiatry 2018; 18: 35.
    1. Habets P, Jeandarme I, Kennedy HG. Applicability of the DUNDRUM-1 in a forensic Belgium setting. J Forensic Pract 2019; 21: 85–94.
    1. Jones RM, Patel K, Simpson AIF. Assessment of need for inpatient treatment for mental disorder among female prisoners: a cross-sectional study of provincially detained women in Ontario. BMC Psychiatry 2019; 19: 98.
    1. Lawrence D, Davies TL, Bagshaw R, Hewlett P, Taylor P, Watt A. External validity and anchoring heuristics: application of DUNDRUM-1 to secure service gatekeeping in South Wales. BJPsych Bull 2018; 42: 10–8.
    1. UK Government. National Health Service Act 2006: 2006 Part 1, Section 4(1). HMSO, 2006.
    1. Department of Health. Mental Health Act 1983: Code of Practice. HMSO, 2015.
    1. Eckert M, Schel SHH, Kennedy HG, Bulten BH(E). Patient characteristics related to length of stay in Dutch Forensic Psychiatric Care. J Forensic Psychiatry Psychol 2017; 28: 863–80.
    1. Jeandarme I, Habets P. Determining security need in forensic psychiatric patients: HoNOS-Secure and DUNDRUM-1. Tijdschr Psychiatr 2019; 61: 455–63.
    1. Jeandarme I, Habets P, Kennedy H. Structured versus unstructured judgment: DUNDRUM-1 compared to court decisions. Int J Law Psychiatry 2019; 64: 205–10.
    1. Monaghan JSH. Violence and Mental Disorder: Developments in Risk Assessment. Univeristy of Chicago Press, 1994.

Source: PubMed

Sponsorer och medarbetare

Medicinska tillstånd

Läkemedelsinterventioner

3
Prenumerera