• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

急性精神科设施出院患者暴力风险评估简要清单:一项初步研究。

Brief checklists for assessing violence risk among patients discharged from acute psychiatric facilities: a preliminary study.

作者信息

Hartvig Pål, Alfarnes Svein, Ostberg Bjørn, Skjønberg Mona, Moger Tron A

机构信息

Centre for Research and Education in Forensic Psychiatry, Ullevaal University Hospital, Bygg 7, Gaustad, NO-0320, Oslo, Norway.

出版信息

Nord J Psychiatry. 2006;60(3):243-8. doi: 10.1080/08039480600780532.

DOI:10.1080/08039480600780532
PMID:16720517
Abstract

Violence risk assessment instruments are increasingly being used. Their use has, however, mostly been confined to forensic psychiatry for assessing the risk among perpetrators to repeat violent acts. In general psychiatry, very few studies of violence risk among discharged persons from acute inpatient units have been conducted. The available instruments are extensive and time consuming. This study aimed at the construction of a brief checklist. A 33-item scale, the PS (Preliminary Scheme), strongly influenced by the established HCR-20 (Historical, Clinical and Risk Management Assessment Scheme) was developed to undergo logistic regression analysis and possible item reduction. One hundred and ten patients from an acute inpatient unit, scored with PS at discharge, were monitored for violent episodes throughout the following year. Risk assessments and violence registrations were then compared. Of the 110 patients, 29 (26%) had acted violently during the follow-up, with the PS showing a definite association with post-discharge violence. Receiver operating characteristics (ROC) for the instrument yielded an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.71 (P<0.01). Regression analysis indicated that the number of PS items could be strongly reduced without losing predictive validity. Even a four-item checklist showed a higher AUC (0.77) than the PS did with all 33 items. The four items were: 1) Previous violence, 2) Substance use problems, 3) Lack of empathy and 4) Stress. The development of a brief risk assessment instrument with good predictive properties seems possible. Further clinical trials are planned. Ethical aspects of violence prediction must always be considered.

摘要

暴力风险评估工具的使用越来越广泛。然而,其应用大多局限于法医精神病学领域,用于评估犯罪者再次实施暴力行为的风险。在普通精神病学中,针对急性住院部出院患者的暴力风险研究极少。现有的评估工具内容繁多且耗时。本研究旨在构建一份简短的检查表。我们开发了一个受既定的HCR - 20(历史、临床和风险管理评估方案)强烈影响的包含33个条目的量表,即PS(初步方案),以进行逻辑回归分析及可能的条目删减。对来自急性住院部的110名患者在出院时进行PS评分,并在接下来的一年中监测其暴力事件。然后将风险评估与暴力记录进行比较。在这110名患者中,29名(26%)在随访期间有暴力行为,PS显示出与出院后暴力行为有明确关联。该工具的受试者工作特征曲线(ROC)下的面积(AUC)为0.71(P<0.01)。回归分析表明,PS条目的数量可以大幅减少而不丧失预测效度。即便一个四项检查表的AUC(0.77)也高于包含所有33个条目的PS。这四个条目分别是:1)既往暴力史,2)物质使用问题,3)缺乏同理心,4)压力。开发一种具有良好预测性能的简短风险评估工具似乎是可行的。计划开展进一步的临床试验。暴力预测的伦理问题必须始终予以考虑。

相似文献

1
Brief checklists for assessing violence risk among patients discharged from acute psychiatric facilities: a preliminary study.急性精神科设施出院患者暴力风险评估简要清单:一项初步研究。
Nord J Psychiatry. 2006;60(3):243-8. doi: 10.1080/08039480600780532.
2
[The impact of mental disorders on quality of life perceived by patients discharged from a security psychiatric hospital].[精神障碍对从安全精神病医院出院患者所感知生活质量的影响]
Encephale. 2007 Dec;33(6):892-901. doi: 10.1016/j.encep.2006.12.003. Epub 2007 Sep 5.
3
The first step in the validation of a new screen for violence risk in acute psychiatry: The inpatient context.新的急性精神病学暴力风险筛查工具验证的第一步:住院环境。
Eur Psychiatry. 2011 Mar;26(2):92-9. doi: 10.1016/j.eurpsy.2010.01.003. Epub 2010 Apr 24.
4
Predictors of violent behavior among acute psychiatric patients: clinical study.急性精神病患者暴力行为的预测因素:临床研究
Psychiatry Clin Neurosci. 2008 Jun;62(3):247-55. doi: 10.1111/j.1440-1819.2008.01790.x.
5
Predicting inpatient violence in acute psychiatric wards using the Brøset-Violence-Checklist: a multicentre prospective cohort study.使用布罗泽特暴力检查表预测急性精神科病房的住院患者暴力行为:一项多中心前瞻性队列研究。
J Psychiatr Ment Health Nurs. 2004 Aug;11(4):422-7. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2850.2004.00733.x.
6
[Predicting aggression during the treatment of forensic psychiatric patients by means of the HCR-20].[运用HCR-20预测法医精神病患者治疗期间的攻击行为]
Tijdschr Psychiatr. 2011;53(10):705-13.
7
Violent behavior in acute psychiatric inpatient facilities: a national survey in Italy.急性精神科住院设施中的暴力行为:意大利的一项全国性调查。
J Nerv Ment Dis. 2009 Oct;197(10):772-82. doi: 10.1097/NMD.0b013e3181bb0d6b.
8
Integrating DSM-IV factors to predict violence in high-risk psychiatric patients.整合《精神疾病诊断与统计手册》第四版的因素以预测高危精神病患者的暴力行为。
J Forensic Sci. 2010 Jan;55(1):121-8. doi: 10.1111/j.1556-4029.2009.01197.x. Epub 2009 Oct 14.
9
Violent behaviour by general psychiatric patients in Sweden - validation of Classification of Violence Risk (COVR) software.瑞典一般精神科患者的暴力行为 - 分类暴力风险(COVR)软件的验证。
Psychiatry Res. 2011 Jun 30;188(1):161-5. doi: 10.1016/j.psychres.2010.12.021. Epub 2011 Jan 8.
10
A secondstep in development of a checklist for screening risk for violence in acute psychiatric patients: evaluation of interrater reliability of the Preliminary Scheme 33.制定急性精神病患者暴力风险筛查清单的第二步:初步方案33的评分者间信度评估。
Psychol Rep. 2007 Dec;101(3 Pt 2):1145-61. doi: 10.2466/pr0.101.4.1145-1161.

引用本文的文献

1
Dangerousness Index in Forensic Psychiatric Examination: A Tool for Aiding Medical Decision Regarding the Risk of Antisocial Acts.法医精神病学检查中的危险性指数:一种辅助关于反社会行为风险医学决策的工具。
Diagnostics (Basel). 2025 Apr 15;15(8):1004. doi: 10.3390/diagnostics15081004.
2
Validation of a violence risk screening for youth in psychiatric inpatient care-a pilot study of V-RISK-Y.精神科住院护理中青少年暴力风险筛查的验证——V-RISK-Y的一项试点研究
Front Psychiatry. 2023 Jul 26;14:1210871. doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2023.1210871. eCollection 2023.
3
Course and predictors of physical aggressive behaviour after discharge from a psychiatric inpatient unit: 1 year follow-up.
出院后精神科住院患者身体攻击行为的过程和预测因素:1 年随访。
Community Ment Health J. 2013 Aug;49(4):451-6. doi: 10.1007/s10597-012-9530-1. Epub 2012 Jul 21.