Cargando…

The Forensic Restrictiveness Questionnaire: Development, Validation, and Revision

Introduction: Forensic psychiatric care is often practiced in closed institutions. These highly regulated, secure, and prescriptive environments arguably reduce patient autonomy, self-expression, and personhood. Taken together these settings are restrictive as patients’ active participation in clini...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Tomlin, Jack, Völlm, Birgit, Furtado, Vivek, Egan, Vincent, Bartlett, Peter
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6872494/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31803075
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2019.00805
_version_ 1783472494678638592
author Tomlin, Jack
Völlm, Birgit
Furtado, Vivek
Egan, Vincent
Bartlett, Peter
author_facet Tomlin, Jack
Völlm, Birgit
Furtado, Vivek
Egan, Vincent
Bartlett, Peter
author_sort Tomlin, Jack
collection PubMed
description Introduction: Forensic psychiatric care is often practiced in closed institutions. These highly regulated, secure, and prescriptive environments arguably reduce patient autonomy, self-expression, and personhood. Taken together these settings are restrictive as patients’ active participation in clinical, organizational, community, and personal life-worlds are curtailed. The consequences of patients’ experiences of restrictiveness have not been explored empirically. This study aimed to develop a psychometrically-valid measure of experiences of restrictiveness. This paper presents the development, validation, and revision of the Forensic Restrictiveness Questionnaire (FRQ). Methods: In total, 235 patients recruited from low, medium, and high secure hospitals across England completed the FRQ. The dimensionality of the 56-item FRQ was tested using Principle Axis Factor Analysis and parallel analysis. Internal consistency was explored with Cronbach’s α. Ward climate (EssenCES) and quality of life (FQL-SV) questionnaires were completed by participants as indicators of convergent validity. Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) and Cronbach’s α guided the removal of items that did not scale adequately. Results: The analysis indicated good psychometric properties. EFA revealed a unidimensional structure, suggesting a single latent factor. Convergent validity was confirmed as the FRQ was significantly negatively correlated with quality of life (Spearman’s ρ = −0.72) and ward climate (Spearman’s ρ = −0.61). Internal consistency was strong (α = 0.93). Forty-one items were removed from the pilot FRQ. The data indicate that a final 15-item FRQ is a valid and internally reliable measure. Conclusion: The FRQ offers a novel and helpful method for clinicians and researchers to measure and explore forensic patients’ experiences of restrictiveness within secure hospitals.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6872494
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-68724942019-12-04 The Forensic Restrictiveness Questionnaire: Development, Validation, and Revision Tomlin, Jack Völlm, Birgit Furtado, Vivek Egan, Vincent Bartlett, Peter Front Psychiatry Psychiatry Introduction: Forensic psychiatric care is often practiced in closed institutions. These highly regulated, secure, and prescriptive environments arguably reduce patient autonomy, self-expression, and personhood. Taken together these settings are restrictive as patients’ active participation in clinical, organizational, community, and personal life-worlds are curtailed. The consequences of patients’ experiences of restrictiveness have not been explored empirically. This study aimed to develop a psychometrically-valid measure of experiences of restrictiveness. This paper presents the development, validation, and revision of the Forensic Restrictiveness Questionnaire (FRQ). Methods: In total, 235 patients recruited from low, medium, and high secure hospitals across England completed the FRQ. The dimensionality of the 56-item FRQ was tested using Principle Axis Factor Analysis and parallel analysis. Internal consistency was explored with Cronbach’s α. Ward climate (EssenCES) and quality of life (FQL-SV) questionnaires were completed by participants as indicators of convergent validity. Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) and Cronbach’s α guided the removal of items that did not scale adequately. Results: The analysis indicated good psychometric properties. EFA revealed a unidimensional structure, suggesting a single latent factor. Convergent validity was confirmed as the FRQ was significantly negatively correlated with quality of life (Spearman’s ρ = −0.72) and ward climate (Spearman’s ρ = −0.61). Internal consistency was strong (α = 0.93). Forty-one items were removed from the pilot FRQ. The data indicate that a final 15-item FRQ is a valid and internally reliable measure. Conclusion: The FRQ offers a novel and helpful method for clinicians and researchers to measure and explore forensic patients’ experiences of restrictiveness within secure hospitals. Frontiers Media S.A. 2019-11-15 /pmc/articles/PMC6872494/ /pubmed/31803075 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2019.00805 Text en Copyright © 2019 Tomlin, Völlm, Furtado, Egan and Bartlett http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Psychiatry
Tomlin, Jack
Völlm, Birgit
Furtado, Vivek
Egan, Vincent
Bartlett, Peter
The Forensic Restrictiveness Questionnaire: Development, Validation, and Revision
title The Forensic Restrictiveness Questionnaire: Development, Validation, and Revision
title_full The Forensic Restrictiveness Questionnaire: Development, Validation, and Revision
title_fullStr The Forensic Restrictiveness Questionnaire: Development, Validation, and Revision
title_full_unstemmed The Forensic Restrictiveness Questionnaire: Development, Validation, and Revision
title_short The Forensic Restrictiveness Questionnaire: Development, Validation, and Revision
title_sort forensic restrictiveness questionnaire: development, validation, and revision
topic Psychiatry
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6872494/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31803075
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2019.00805
work_keys_str_mv AT tomlinjack theforensicrestrictivenessquestionnairedevelopmentvalidationandrevision
AT vollmbirgit theforensicrestrictivenessquestionnairedevelopmentvalidationandrevision
AT furtadovivek theforensicrestrictivenessquestionnairedevelopmentvalidationandrevision
AT eganvincent theforensicrestrictivenessquestionnairedevelopmentvalidationandrevision
AT bartlettpeter theforensicrestrictivenessquestionnairedevelopmentvalidationandrevision
AT tomlinjack forensicrestrictivenessquestionnairedevelopmentvalidationandrevision
AT vollmbirgit forensicrestrictivenessquestionnairedevelopmentvalidationandrevision
AT furtadovivek forensicrestrictivenessquestionnairedevelopmentvalidationandrevision
AT eganvincent forensicrestrictivenessquestionnairedevelopmentvalidationandrevision
AT bartlettpeter forensicrestrictivenessquestionnairedevelopmentvalidationandrevision