Cargando…

Patient‐rated impulsivity and aggression compared with clinician‐rated risk in a forensic psychiatric sample: Predicting inpatient incidents

BACKGROUND: Measures of impulsivity and aggression help to indicate risk of future violence or rule‐breaking. Both clinician‐rated risk assessment and self‐report measures have been used but hardly ever compared in their ability to predict inpatient incidents. AIMS: To compare the self‐report on the...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Karsten, Julie, Akkerman‐Bouwsema, Gerjonne J., Hagenauw, Loes A., Gerlsma, Coby, Lancel, Marike
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6972564/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31667931
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cbm.2131
_version_ 1783489858431352832
author Karsten, Julie
Akkerman‐Bouwsema, Gerjonne J.
Hagenauw, Loes A.
Gerlsma, Coby
Lancel, Marike
author_facet Karsten, Julie
Akkerman‐Bouwsema, Gerjonne J.
Hagenauw, Loes A.
Gerlsma, Coby
Lancel, Marike
author_sort Karsten, Julie
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Measures of impulsivity and aggression help to indicate risk of future violence or rule‐breaking. Both clinician‐rated risk assessment and self‐report measures have been used but hardly ever compared in their ability to predict inpatient incidents. AIMS: To compare the self‐report on the Barratt Impulsiveness Scale (BIS‐11) and Buss‐Perry Aggression Questionnaire (BPAQ) with the clinician‐rated HKT‐30, a Dutch adaptation of the Historical Clinical Risk Management‐20, for their capacity to predict inpatient incidents. METHODS: All men newly admitted to a forensic psychiatric hospital were invited to participate in this study unless in intensive care. Tests of correlation were run between the BIS‐11 and BPAQ scale scores and the HKT‐30. Each was then tested separately for capacity to predict the number of aggressive and nonaggressive incidents while resident. Finally, scores of all rating scales were entered together into a negative binomial regression to compare their relative strengths in predicting later incidents. RESULTS: Patient and staff baseline impulsivity and aggression ratings correlated moderately well. All measures performed well in univariate analyses of relationship between baseline measures and later incidents. In final models, which included both patient and staff baseline ratings, the HKT‐30 generally outperformed the self‐report measures in the prediction of aggressive and nonaggressive incidents in both the first year and total length of stay. IMPLICATIONS FOR CLINICAL PRACTICE: Our findings suggest that some reliance may be placed on patient ratings of their own propensity for impulsive and/or violent acts, but, when used, they should remain combined with clinician‐rated risk assessment for the time being. Future research should explore their utility in dialogue about treatment, and also the relative strength of staff response to each.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6972564
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-69725642020-01-27 Patient‐rated impulsivity and aggression compared with clinician‐rated risk in a forensic psychiatric sample: Predicting inpatient incidents Karsten, Julie Akkerman‐Bouwsema, Gerjonne J. Hagenauw, Loes A. Gerlsma, Coby Lancel, Marike Crim Behav Ment Health Original Articles BACKGROUND: Measures of impulsivity and aggression help to indicate risk of future violence or rule‐breaking. Both clinician‐rated risk assessment and self‐report measures have been used but hardly ever compared in their ability to predict inpatient incidents. AIMS: To compare the self‐report on the Barratt Impulsiveness Scale (BIS‐11) and Buss‐Perry Aggression Questionnaire (BPAQ) with the clinician‐rated HKT‐30, a Dutch adaptation of the Historical Clinical Risk Management‐20, for their capacity to predict inpatient incidents. METHODS: All men newly admitted to a forensic psychiatric hospital were invited to participate in this study unless in intensive care. Tests of correlation were run between the BIS‐11 and BPAQ scale scores and the HKT‐30. Each was then tested separately for capacity to predict the number of aggressive and nonaggressive incidents while resident. Finally, scores of all rating scales were entered together into a negative binomial regression to compare their relative strengths in predicting later incidents. RESULTS: Patient and staff baseline impulsivity and aggression ratings correlated moderately well. All measures performed well in univariate analyses of relationship between baseline measures and later incidents. In final models, which included both patient and staff baseline ratings, the HKT‐30 generally outperformed the self‐report measures in the prediction of aggressive and nonaggressive incidents in both the first year and total length of stay. IMPLICATIONS FOR CLINICAL PRACTICE: Our findings suggest that some reliance may be placed on patient ratings of their own propensity for impulsive and/or violent acts, but, when used, they should remain combined with clinician‐rated risk assessment for the time being. Future research should explore their utility in dialogue about treatment, and also the relative strength of staff response to each. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2019-10-30 2019-12 /pmc/articles/PMC6972564/ /pubmed/31667931 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cbm.2131 Text en © 2019 The Authors. Criminal Behaviour and Mental Health published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.
spellingShingle Original Articles
Karsten, Julie
Akkerman‐Bouwsema, Gerjonne J.
Hagenauw, Loes A.
Gerlsma, Coby
Lancel, Marike
Patient‐rated impulsivity and aggression compared with clinician‐rated risk in a forensic psychiatric sample: Predicting inpatient incidents
title Patient‐rated impulsivity and aggression compared with clinician‐rated risk in a forensic psychiatric sample: Predicting inpatient incidents
title_full Patient‐rated impulsivity and aggression compared with clinician‐rated risk in a forensic psychiatric sample: Predicting inpatient incidents
title_fullStr Patient‐rated impulsivity and aggression compared with clinician‐rated risk in a forensic psychiatric sample: Predicting inpatient incidents
title_full_unstemmed Patient‐rated impulsivity and aggression compared with clinician‐rated risk in a forensic psychiatric sample: Predicting inpatient incidents
title_short Patient‐rated impulsivity and aggression compared with clinician‐rated risk in a forensic psychiatric sample: Predicting inpatient incidents
title_sort patient‐rated impulsivity and aggression compared with clinician‐rated risk in a forensic psychiatric sample: predicting inpatient incidents
topic Original Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6972564/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31667931
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cbm.2131
work_keys_str_mv AT karstenjulie patientratedimpulsivityandaggressioncomparedwithclinicianratedriskinaforensicpsychiatricsamplepredictinginpatientincidents
AT akkermanbouwsemagerjonnej patientratedimpulsivityandaggressioncomparedwithclinicianratedriskinaforensicpsychiatricsamplepredictinginpatientincidents
AT hagenauwloesa patientratedimpulsivityandaggressioncomparedwithclinicianratedriskinaforensicpsychiatricsamplepredictinginpatientincidents
AT gerlsmacoby patientratedimpulsivityandaggressioncomparedwithclinicianratedriskinaforensicpsychiatricsamplepredictinginpatientincidents
AT lancelmarike patientratedimpulsivityandaggressioncomparedwithclinicianratedriskinaforensicpsychiatricsamplepredictinginpatientincidents