Gunenc Cevher, O'Shea Laura E, Dickens Geoffrey L
Plymouth University, Plymouth, UK.
St Andrew's Healthcare, Northampton, UK.
Crim Behav Ment Health. 2018 Feb;28(1):61-71. doi: 10.1002/cbm.2036. Epub 2017 Jun 1.
Structured risk assessment is commonly used in secure settings to aid prediction and prevention of risky behaviours; the expected benefits have rarely been investigated.
The aim of the study is to determine whether adverse outcomes (physical and verbal aggression, self-harm, victimisation, self-neglect, unauthorised leave and substance abuse) reduced after patients were assessed with the Short-term Assessment of Risk and Treatability (START).
In a naturalistic study, anonymised demographic and clinical information was collected from 50 male patients. Data included START assessment and frequency of target behaviour for 3 months before and after first assessment. Chi-square and linear mixed models analyses were used to determine whether there was any change in the behaviours of interest.
There were no significant changes in physical or verbal aggression over time, although a tendency towards fewer incidents was apparent. Other adverse behaviours were very infrequent at baseline, precluding adequate analysis.
In this small sample, START did not achieve its primary purpose of significant reduction in adverse behaviours. Although our sample size was informed by a power calculation, we may have over-estimated the size of anticipated change. Further, the 3-month comparison periods before and after the assessment follow-up period were rather short. Accordingly, we recommend more research on the value of this tool in practice rather than discontinuing its use. Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
结构化风险评估常用于安全环境中,以辅助预测和预防危险行为;但其预期益处鲜有研究。
本研究旨在确定使用短期风险与可治疗性评估(START)对患者进行评估后,不良后果(身体和言语攻击、自我伤害、受侵害、自我忽视、擅自离开和药物滥用)是否减少。
在一项自然主义研究中,收集了50名男性患者的匿名人口统计学和临床信息。数据包括START评估以及首次评估前后3个月目标行为的发生频率。采用卡方检验和线性混合模型分析来确定感兴趣的行为是否有任何变化。
随着时间推移,身体或言语攻击行为无显著变化,尽管事件数量有减少的趋势。其他不良行为在基线时非常罕见,无法进行充分分析。
在这个小样本中,START未能实现显著减少不良行为的主要目的。尽管我们的样本量是通过功效计算确定的,但我们可能高估了预期变化的幅度。此外,评估随访期前后3个月的比较期相当短。因此,我们建议对该工具在实践中的价值进行更多研究,而不是停止使用它。版权所有© 2017约翰威立父子有限公司。