Cargando…
Triage, decision-making and follow-up of patients referred to a UK forensic service: validation of the DUNDRUM toolkit
BACKGROUND: Forensic medium secure services in the UK are a scarce but essential resource providing care for those in the criminal justice system with severe mental disorder. Appropriate allocation of beds to those most in need is essential to ensure efficient use of this resource. To improve decisi...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2015
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4597384/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26446536 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12888-015-0620-9 |
_version_ | 1782393913095487488 |
---|---|
author | Freestone, Mark Bull, Deborah Brown, Roz Boast, Neil Blazey, Faye Gilluley, Paul |
author_facet | Freestone, Mark Bull, Deborah Brown, Roz Boast, Neil Blazey, Faye Gilluley, Paul |
author_sort | Freestone, Mark |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Forensic medium secure services in the UK are a scarce but essential resource providing care for those in the criminal justice system with severe mental disorder. Appropriate allocation of beds to those most in need is essential to ensure efficient use of this resource. To improve decision-making processes in a UK forensic service, an admissions panel utilized the DUNDRUM 1&2 (D1 & D2) triage instruments. METHODS: Demographic, diagnostic and clinical information on a prospective sample of referrals to a UK adult forensic service was gathered (n = 195). D1 and D2 measures were scored by a panel of clinical managers considering referral information and clinician opinion in reaching their ratings; those not admitted were also followed up. RESULTS: Within the sample, D1 ratings were predictive of decisions to admit (AUC = .79) and also differentiated between levels of security (F(4) = 16.54, p < .001). Non-admission was not significantly associated with increased risk of offending at follow-up. Items relating to self-harm and institutional behaviour did not show a predictive relationship with the panel decision to admit. CONCLUSIONS: Use of a structured professional judgement tool showing good predictive validity has improved transparency of decisions and appears to be associated with more efficient use of resources, without increased risk to the public. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4597384 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2015 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-45973842015-10-08 Triage, decision-making and follow-up of patients referred to a UK forensic service: validation of the DUNDRUM toolkit Freestone, Mark Bull, Deborah Brown, Roz Boast, Neil Blazey, Faye Gilluley, Paul BMC Psychiatry Research Article BACKGROUND: Forensic medium secure services in the UK are a scarce but essential resource providing care for those in the criminal justice system with severe mental disorder. Appropriate allocation of beds to those most in need is essential to ensure efficient use of this resource. To improve decision-making processes in a UK forensic service, an admissions panel utilized the DUNDRUM 1&2 (D1 & D2) triage instruments. METHODS: Demographic, diagnostic and clinical information on a prospective sample of referrals to a UK adult forensic service was gathered (n = 195). D1 and D2 measures were scored by a panel of clinical managers considering referral information and clinician opinion in reaching their ratings; those not admitted were also followed up. RESULTS: Within the sample, D1 ratings were predictive of decisions to admit (AUC = .79) and also differentiated between levels of security (F(4) = 16.54, p < .001). Non-admission was not significantly associated with increased risk of offending at follow-up. Items relating to self-harm and institutional behaviour did not show a predictive relationship with the panel decision to admit. CONCLUSIONS: Use of a structured professional judgement tool showing good predictive validity has improved transparency of decisions and appears to be associated with more efficient use of resources, without increased risk to the public. BioMed Central 2015-10-07 /pmc/articles/PMC4597384/ /pubmed/26446536 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12888-015-0620-9 Text en © Freestone et al. 2015 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Freestone, Mark Bull, Deborah Brown, Roz Boast, Neil Blazey, Faye Gilluley, Paul Triage, decision-making and follow-up of patients referred to a UK forensic service: validation of the DUNDRUM toolkit |
title | Triage, decision-making and follow-up of patients referred to a UK forensic service: validation of the DUNDRUM toolkit |
title_full | Triage, decision-making and follow-up of patients referred to a UK forensic service: validation of the DUNDRUM toolkit |
title_fullStr | Triage, decision-making and follow-up of patients referred to a UK forensic service: validation of the DUNDRUM toolkit |
title_full_unstemmed | Triage, decision-making and follow-up of patients referred to a UK forensic service: validation of the DUNDRUM toolkit |
title_short | Triage, decision-making and follow-up of patients referred to a UK forensic service: validation of the DUNDRUM toolkit |
title_sort | triage, decision-making and follow-up of patients referred to a uk forensic service: validation of the dundrum toolkit |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4597384/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26446536 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12888-015-0620-9 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT freestonemark triagedecisionmakingandfollowupofpatientsreferredtoaukforensicservicevalidationofthedundrumtoolkit AT bulldeborah triagedecisionmakingandfollowupofpatientsreferredtoaukforensicservicevalidationofthedundrumtoolkit AT brownroz triagedecisionmakingandfollowupofpatientsreferredtoaukforensicservicevalidationofthedundrumtoolkit AT boastneil triagedecisionmakingandfollowupofpatientsreferredtoaukforensicservicevalidationofthedundrumtoolkit AT blazeyfaye triagedecisionmakingandfollowupofpatientsreferredtoaukforensicservicevalidationofthedundrumtoolkit AT gilluleypaul triagedecisionmakingandfollowupofpatientsreferredtoaukforensicservicevalidationofthedundrumtoolkit |