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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Freestone, Mark, Bull, Deborah, Brown, Roz, Boast, Neil, Blazey, Faye, Gilluley, Paul
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