The DUNDRUM Quartet: validation of structured professional judgement instruments DUNDRUM-3 assessment of programme completion and DUNDRUM-4 assessment of recovery in forensic mental health services

BMC Research Notes

Harry G Kennedy²  Kim McDonnell¹  Elaine Doyle¹  Zareena Abidin¹  Mary Davoren¹  Sarah O'Dwyer¹ 

[1] National Forensic Mental Health Service, Central Mental Hospital, Dundrum, Dublin 14, Ireland;Department of Psychiatry, Trinity College, Dublin, Ireland

关键词: needs assessment;    risk;    recovery;    rehabilitation;    mental health;    Forensic;   

Others  :  1167405
DOI  :  10.1186/1756-0500-4-229

 received in 2011-01-17, accepted in 2011-07-03,  发布年份 2011

【 摘 要 】

Background

Moving a forensic mental health patient from one level of therapeutic security to a lower level or to the community is influenced by more than risk assessment and risk management. We set out to construct and validate structured professional judgement instruments for consistency and transparency in decision making

Methods

Two instruments were developed, the seven-item DUNDRUM-3 programme completion instrument and the six item DUNDRUM-4 recovery instrument. These were assessed for all 95 forensic patients at Ireland's only forensic mental health hospital.

Results

The two instruments had good internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha 0.911 and 0.887). Scores distinguished those allowed no leave or accompanied leave from those with unaccompanied leave (ANOVA F = 38.1 and 50.3 respectively, p < 0.001). Scores also distinguished those in acute/high security units from those in medium or in low secure/pre-discharge units. Each individual item distinguished these levels of need significantly. The DUNDRUM-3 and DUNDRUM-4 correlated moderately with measures of dynamic risk and with the CANFOR staff rated unmet need (Spearman r = 0.5, p < 0.001).

Conclusions

The DUNDRUM-3 programme completion items distinguished significantly between levels of therapeutic security while the DUNDRUM-4 recovery items consistently distinguished those given unaccompanied leave outside the hospital and those in the lowest levels of therapeutic security. This data forms the basis for a prospective study of outcomes now underway.

【 授权许可】

   
2011 Kennedy et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Flynn G, O'Neill C, Kennedy HG: The DUNDRUM-1 structured professional judgment for triage to appropriate levels of therapeutic security: retrospective-cohort validation study. BMC Psychiatry 2011, 11:43. BioMed Central Full Text
• [2]Kennedy HG, O'Neill C, Flynn G, Gill P: [http://hdl.handle.net/2262/39131] webciteThe Dundrum Toolkit. Dangerousness, Understanding, Recovery and Urgency Manual (The Dundrum Quartet) V1.0.21 (18/03/10). Four Structured Professional Judgment Instruments for Admission Triage, Urgency, Treatment Completion and Recovery Assessments. Dublin, Ireland, Trinity College Dublin; 2010.
• [3]Pillay SM, Oliver B, Butler L, Kennedy HG: Risk stratification and the care pathway. Irish Journal of Psychological Medicine 2008, 25(4):123-127.
• [4]Kennedy HG: Therapeutic Uses of Security: mapping forensic mental health services by stratifying risk. Advances in Psychiatric Treatment 2002, 8:433-443.
• [5]Muller-Isberner M, Webster CD, Gretenkord L: Measuring progress in hospital order treatment: relationship between levels of security and C and R scores of the HCR-20. Int J Forensic Men Health 2007, 6:113-121.
• [6]Ijaz A, Papaconstantinou A, O'Neill H, Kennedy HG: The Suicide Risk Assessment and Management Manual (S-RAMM) Validation Study I: Inter-Rater Reliability, Internal Consistency, and Discriminatory Capacity. Irish Journal of Psychological Medicine 2009, 26(2):54-58.
• [7]Fagan J, Papaconstantinou A, Ijaz I, Lynch A, O'Neill H, Kennedy HG: The Suicide Risk Assessment and Management Manual (S-RAMM) Validation Study II: Prospective Study of a Structured Professional Judgement Tool for Suicide Risk Assessment. Irish Journal of Psychological Medicine 2009, 26(3):107-113.
• [8]Kozma CM, Dirani RG, Canuso CM, Mao L: Predicting hospital admission and discharge with symptom or function scores in patients with schizophrenia: pooled analysis of a clinical trial extension. [http://www.annals-general-psychiatry.com/content/9/1/24] webciteAnnals of General Psychiatry 2010, 9:24. BioMed Central Full Text
• [9]Webster CS, Douglas KS, Eaves D, Hart SD: HCR-20: Assessing risk for violence, version 2. Burnaby, British Columbia: Simon Fraser University; 1997.
• [10]Lyell M, Bartlett A: Decision making in medium security: can he leave? Journal of Forensic Psychiatry and Psychology 2010, 211(6):887-901.
• [11]Bouch J, Marshall JJ: S-RAMM: Suicide Risk Assessment and Management Manual (Research Edition). Cognitive Centre Foundation, Vale of Glamorgan; 2003.
• [12]Webster CD, Martin ML, Brink J, Nicholls TL, Desmarais SL: Short-Term Assessment of Risk and Treatability (START) Version 1.1. BC Mental Health and Addiction Services Coquitlam. British Columbia & St Joseph's Healthcare Hamilton, Ontario; 2009.
• [13]Kay SR, Fiszbein A, Opler LA: The positive and negative syndrome scale (PANSS) for schizophrenia. Schizophrenia Bulletin 1987, 13:261-277.
• [14]American Psychiatric Association: Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. 4th edition. Washington DC: American Psychiatric Association; 1994.
• [15]Thomas S, Harty MA, Parrott J, McCrone P, Slade M, Thornicroft G: CANFOR: Camberwell Assessment of Need - Forensic Version. A needs assessment for forensic mental health service users. London, Gaskell; 2003.
• [16]SPSS 16 for Windows 2007. Release 16.0.1
• [17]Prochaska JO, DiClemente CC: Stages and processes of self-change of smoking: towards an integrative model of change. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 1983, 51:350-395.
• [18]DiClemente CC, Prochaska JO, Fairhurst SK, Velicer WF, Velasquez MM, Rossi JR: The process of smoking cessation: an analysis of pre-contemplation, contemplation and preparation stages of change. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 1991, 59:295-304.
• [19]Andresen R, Oades L, Caputi P: The experience of recovery from schizophrenia: towards an empirically-validated stage model. [http://www.uow.edu.au/health/iimh/index.html] webciteAustralian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry 2003, 37:586-594.
• [20]Weeks G, Slade M, Hayward M: A UK validation of the stages of recovery instrument. International Journal of Social Psychiatry 2010.
• [21]Maslow AH: A Theory of Human Motivation. Psychological Review 1943, 50(4):370-96.
• [22]Risk Management Authority of Scotland: [http://www.rmascotland.gov.uk] webciteRisk Assessment Tools Evaluation Directory (RATED) version 1. Scotland: Astron; 2006.
• [23]Resnick SG, Rosenhack RA, Lehman AF: An exploratory analysis of correlates of recovery. Psychiatric Services 2004, 55:540-547.
• [24]Burgess P, Pirkis J, Coombes T, Rosen A: Review of Recovery Measures version 1.01. Australian Mental Health Outcomes and Classification Network; 2010.