Skip to main content
×
×
Home

A systematic review and synthesis of outcome domains for use within forensic services for people with intellectual disabilities

  • Catrin Morrissey (a1), Peter E. Langdon (a2), Nicole Geach (a3), Verity Chester (a4), Michael Ferriter (a5), William R. Lindsay (a6), Jane McCarthy (a7), John Devapriam (a8), Dawn-Marie Walker (a9), Conor Duggan (a10) and Regi Alexander (a11)...
Abstract
Background

There is limited empirical information on service-level outcome domains and indicators for the large number of people with intellectual disabilities being treated in forensic psychiatric hospitals.

Aims

This study identified and developed the domains that should be used to measure treatment outcomes for this population.

Method

A systematic review of the literature highlighted 60 studies which met eligibility criteria; they were synthesised using content analysis. The findings were refined within a consultation and consensus exercises with carers, patients and experts.

Results

The final framework encompassed three a priori superordinate domains: (a) effectiveness, (b) patient safety and (c) patient and carer experience. Within each of these, further sub-domains emerged from our systematic review and consultation exercises. These included severity of clinical symptoms, offending behaviours, reactive and restrictive interventions, quality of life and patient satisfaction.

Conclusions

To index recovery, services need to measure treatment outcomes using this framework.

  • View HTML
    • Send article to Kindle

      To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

      Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

      Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

      A systematic review and synthesis of outcome domains for use within forensic services for people with intellectual disabilities
      Available formats
      ×
      Send article to Dropbox

      To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

      A systematic review and synthesis of outcome domains for use within forensic services for people with intellectual disabilities
      Available formats
      ×
      Send article to Google Drive

      To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

      A systematic review and synthesis of outcome domains for use within forensic services for people with intellectual disabilities
      Available formats
      ×
Copyright
This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license.
Corresponding author
Correspondence: Regi Alexander, Partnerships in Care, Lion Road, Palgrave, Diss, Norfolk, IP22 1BA. Email: regialexander@nhs.net
Footnotes
Hide All

The full report of this project is published in Health Services and Delivery Research 2017; 5(3), available at: https://www.journalslibrary.nihr.ac.uk/hsdr/hsdr05030/#/abstract

Declaration of interest

None.

Footnotes
References
Hide All
1 Health and Social Care Information Centre. Learning Disabilities Census Report. HSCIC, 2013.
2 Devapriam, J, Rosenbach, A, Alexander, R. In-patient services for people with intellectual disability and mental health or behavioural difficulties. BJPscyh Adv 2015; 21: 116–23.
3 Royal College of Psychiatrists' Faculty of Psychiatry of Intellectual Disability. People with Learning Disability and Mental Health, Behavioural or Forensic Problems: The Role of In-Patient Services. RCPsych, 2013.
4 Esan, F, Chester, V, Gunaratna, IJ, Hoare, S, Alexander, RT. The clinical, forensic and treatment outcome factors of patients with autism spectrum disorder treated in a forensic intellectual disability service. J Appl Res Intellect Disabil 2015; 28: 193200.
5 Alexander, R, Hiremath, A, Chester, V, Green, F, Gunaratna, I, Hoare, S. Evaluation of treatment outcomes from a medium secure unit for people with intellectual disability. Adv Ment Health Intellect Disabil 2011; 5: 2232.
6 Department of Health. The NHS Outcomes Framework 2015/16. Department of Health, 2014.
7 NHS England. Building the Right Support: A National Plan to Develop Community Services and Close Inpatient Facilities for People with a Learning Disability and/or Autism who Display Behaviour that Challenges, Including those with a Mental Health Condition. NHS England, 2015.
8 Fitzpatrick, R, Chambers, J, Burns, T, Doll, H, Fazel, S, Jenkinson, C, et al. A systematic review of outcome measures used in forensic mental health research with consensus panel opinion. Health Technol Assess (Rockv) 2010; 14: 194.
9 Gilbody, SM, House, AO, Sheldon, TA. Outcomes Measurement in Psychiatry: A Critical Review of Outcomes Measurement in Psychiatric Research and Practice. Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, 2003.
10 Leamy, M, Bird, V, Le Boutillier, C, Williams, J, Slade, M. Conceptual framework for personal recovery in mental health: systematic review and narrative synthesis. Br J Psychiatry 2011; 199: 445–2.
11 Department of Health. Transparency in Outcomes: A Framework for the NHS. Department of Health, 2010.
12 Hassiotis, A, Hall, I. Behavioural and cognitive-behavioural interventions for outwardly-directed aggressive behaviour in people with learning disabilities. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2004; 4: CD003406.
13 Duggan, C. The empirical basis of sex offender treatment effectiveness. Sex Offender Treat 2014; 9: 113.
14 Hsieh, H-F, Shannon, SE. Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qual Health Res 2005; 15: 1277–88.
15 Linstone, HA, Turoff, M. The Delphi Method: Techniques and Applications. Addison-Wesley, 1975.
16 Murphy, MK, Black, NA, Lamping, DL, McKee, CM, Sanderson, CF, Askham, J, et al. Consensus development methods, and their use in clinical guideline development. Health Technol Assess 1988; 2(3): iiv, 1–88.
17 Alexander, RT, Crouch, K, Halstead, S, Piachaud, J, Piachaud, J, Singh, I, et al. Long-term outcome from a medium secure service for people with intellectual disability. J Intellect Disabil Res 2006; 50: 305–15.
18 Alexander, RT, Green, FN, O'Mahony, B, Gunaratna, IJ, Gangadharan, SK, Hoare, S. Personality disorders in offenders with intellectual disability: a comparison of clinical, forensic and outcome variables and implications for service provision. J Intellect Disabil Res 2010; 54: 650–8.
19 Alexander, RT, Chester, V, Green, FN, Gunaratna, I, Hoare, S. Arson or fire setting in offenders with intellectual disability: clinical characteristics, forensic histories, and treatment outcomes. J Intellect Dev Disabil 2015; 40: 189–97.
20 Alexander, RT, Chester, V, Gray, NS, Snowden, RJ. Patients with personality disorders and intellectual disability - closer to personality disorders or intellectual disability? A three-way comparison. J Forens Psychiatry Psychol 2012; 23: 435–51.
21 Ayres, M, Roy, A. Supporting people with complex mental health needs to get a life! The role of the Supported Living Outreach Team. Tizard Learn Disabil Rev 2009; 14: 2939.
22 Barron, P, Hassiotis, A, Banes, J. Offenders with intellectual disability: a prospective comparative study. J Intellect Disabil Res 2004; 48: 6976.
23 Benton, C, Roy, A. The first three years of a community forensic service for people with a learning disability. Br J Forensic Pract 2008; 10: 412.
24 Butwell, M, Jamieson, E, Leese, M, Taylor, P. Trends in special (high-security) hospitals. 2: Residency and discharge episodes, 1986-1995. Br J Psychiatry 2000; 176: 260–5.
25 Day, K. A hospital-based treatment programme for male mentally handicapped offenders. Br J Psychiatry 1988; 153: 635–44.
26 Dickens, G, Sugarman, P, Picchioni, M, Long, C. HoNOS-secure: tracking risk and recovery for men in secure care. Br J Forensic Pract 2010; 12: 3646.
27 Fitzgerald, S, Gray, NS, Taylor, J, Snowden, RJ. Risk factors for recidivism in offenders with intellectual disabilities. Psychol Crime Law 2011; 17: 4358.
28 Gray, NS, Fitzgerald, S, Taylor, J, Macculloch, MJ, Snowden, RJ. Predicting future reconviction in offenders with intellectual disabilities: the predictive efficacy of VRAG, PCL-SV, and the HCR-20. Psychol Assess 2007; 19: 474–9.
29 Halstead, S, Cahill, A, Fernando, L, Isweran, M. Discharges from a learning-disability medium secure unit: what happens to them? Br J Forensic Pract 2001; 3: 1121.
30 Lindsay, WR, Smith, AHW, Law, J, Quinn, K, Anderson, A, Smith, A, et al. A treatment service for sex offenders and abusers with intellectual disability: characteristics of referrals and evaluation. J Appl Res Intellect Disabil 2002; 15: 166–74.
31 Lindsay, WR, Smith, AHW, Law, J, Quinn, K, Anderson, A, Smith, A, et al. Sexual and nonsexual offenders with intellectual and learning disabilities: a comparison of characteristics, referral patterns, and outcome. J Interpers Violence 2004; 19: 875–90.
32 Lindsay, WR, Steele, L, Smith, AHW, Quinn, K, Allan, R. A community forensic intellectual disability service: twelve year follow up of referrals, analysis of referral patterns and assessment of harm reduction. Leg Criminol Psychol 2006; 11: 113–30.
33 Lindsay, WR, Steptoe, L, Wallace, L, Haut, F, Brewster, E. An evaluation and 20-year follow-up of a community forensic intellectual disability service. Crim Behav Ment Health 2013; 23: 138–49.
34 Lindsay, WR, Holland, T, Wheeler, JR, Carson, D, O'Brien, G, Taylor, JL, et al. Pathways through services for offenders with intellectual disability: a one- and two-year follow-up study. Am J Intellect Dev Disabil 2010; 115: 250–62.
35 Linhorst, DM, McCutchen, TA, Bennett, L. Recidivism among offenders with developmental disabilities participating in a case management program. Res Dev Disabil 2003; 24: 210–30.
36 Marks, K. Assessing Risk and Outcomes in Offenders Detained in Intellectual Disability and Mental Health Medium Secure Units in the United Kingdom. University of Birmingham, 2011.
37 Morrissey, C, Taylor, J. Changes in personality disorder traits following 2 years of treatment in a secure therapeutic community milieu. J Ment Health Res Intellect Disabil 2014; 7: 323–36.
38 Morrissey, C, Beeley, C, Milton, J. Longitudinal HCR-20 scores in a high-secure psychiatric hospital. Crim Behav Ment Health 2014; 24: 169–80.
39 Morrissey, C, Mooney, P, Hogue, TE, Lindsay, WR, Taylor, JL. Predictive validity of the PCL-R for offenders with intellectual disability in a high security hospital: treatment progress. J Intellect Dev Disabil 2007; 32: 125–33.
40 Morrissey, C, Hobson, B, Faulkner, E, James, T. Outcomes from the National High Secure Learning Disability Service: findings and challenges. Adv Ment Health Intellect Disabil 2015; 9: 116–23.
41 Palucka, AM, Raina, P, Liu, S, Lunsky, Y. The clinical profiles of forensic inpatients with intellectual disabilities in a specialized unit. J Learn Disabil OffendingBehav 2012; 3: 219–27.
42 Reed, S, Russell, A, Xenitidis, K, Murphy, DGM. People with learning disabilities in a low secure in-patient unit: Comparison of offenders and non-offenders. Br J Psychiatry 2004; 185: 499504.
43 Xenitidis, KI, Henry, J, Russell, AJ, Ward, A, Murphy, DG. An inpatient treatment model for adults with mild intellectual disability and challenging behaviour. J Intellect Disabil Res 1999; 43: 128–34.
44 Lindsay, WR, Smith, AHW, Quinn, K, Anderson, A, Smith, A, Allan, R, et al. Women with intellectual disability who have offended: characteristics and outcome. J Intellect Disabil Res 2004; 48: 580–90.
45 Lindsay, WR, Elliot, SF, Astell, A. Predictors of sexual offence recidivism in offenders with intellectual disabilities. J Appl Res Intellect Disabil 2004; 17: 299305.
46 Ajmal, MA. Self-esteem and mental health in a forensic learning disabilities setting. Pakistan J Soc Clin Psychol 2008; 4: 4758.
47 Beer, D, Turk, V, McGovern, P, Gravestock, SM, Brooks, D, Barnett, L, et al. Characteristics of patients exhibiting severe challenging behaviour in low secure mental health and mild learning disabilities units. J Psychiatr Intensive Care 2005; 1: 29.
48 Beer, D, Spiller, MJ, Pickard, M, Gravestock, S, Mcgovern, P, Leese, M, et al. Low secure units: factors predicting delayed discharge. J Forens Psychiatry Psychol 2005; 16: 621–37.
49 Chaplin, E, Eyeoyibo, M, Wright, S, Xenitidis, K, McCarthy, J. Historical and clinical items of the HCR-20 as predictors of risk within an intellectual disability population. Adv Ment Health Intellect Disabil 2015; 9: 62–9.
50 Chilvers, J, Thomas, C. Do male and female forensic patients with learning disabilities differ on subscales of the Novaco Anger Scale and Provocation Inventory (NAS-PI)? J Learn Disabil Offending Behav 2011; 2: 8497.
51 Crossland, S, Burns, M, Leach, C, Quinn, P. Needs assessment in forensic learning disability. Med Sci Law 2005; 45: 147–53.
52 Dickens, G, Picchioni, M, Long, C. Aggression in specialist secure and forensic inpatient mental health care: incidence across care pathways. J Forensic Pract 2013; 15: 206–17.
53 Fitzgerald, S, Gray, N, Alexander, RT, Bagshaw, R, Chesterman, P, Huckle, P, et al. Predicting institutional violence in offenders with intellectual disabilities: the predictive efficacy of the VRAG and the HCR-20. J Appl Res Intellect Disabil 2013; 26: 384–93.
54 Hall, I, Yacoub, E, Boast, N, Bates, R, Stamps, R, Holder, S, et al. Secure inpatient services: a needs assessment. J Intellect Disabil Offending Behav 2014; 5: 3853.
55 Hogue, TE, Mooney, P, Morrissey, C, Steptoe, L, Johnston, S, Lindsay, WR, et al. Emotional and behavioural problems in offenders with intellectual disability: comparative data from three forensic services. J Intellect Disabil Res 2007; 51: 778–85.
56 Johnson, P. The prevalence of low self-esteem in an intellectually disabled forensic population. J Intellect Disabil Res 2012; 56: 317–25.
57 Kellett, S, Beail, N, Newman, DW, Frankish, P. Utility of the brief symptom inventory in the assessment of psychological distress. J Appl Res Intellect Disabil 2003; 16: 127–34.
58 Lindsay, WR, Hogue, TE, Taylor, JL, Steptoe, L, Mooney, P, O'Brien, G, et al. Risk assessment in offenders with intellectual disability: a comparison across three levels of security. Int J Offender Ther Comp Criminol 2008; 52: 90111.
59 Lindsay, W, Carson, D, O'Brien, G, Holland, AJ, Johnston, S, Taylor, JL, et al. The relationship between assessed risk and service security level for offenders with intellectual disability. J Forens Psychiatry Psychol 2010; 21: 537.
60 Lofthouse, RE, Lindsay, WR, Totsika, V, Hastings, RP, Roberts, D. Dynamic risk and violence in individuals with an intellectual disability: tool development and initial validation. J Forens Psychiatry Psychol 2014; 25: 288306.
61 Mansell, J, Ritchie, F, Dyer, R. Health service inpatient units for people with intellectual disabilities and challenging behaviour or mental health problems. J Appl Res Intellect Disabil 2010; 23: 552–9.
62 McMillan, D, Hastings, RP, Coldwell, J. Clinical and actuarial prediction of physical violence in a forensic intellectual disability hospital: a longitudinal study. J Appl Res Intellect Disabil 2004; 17: 255–65.
63 O'Shea, LE, Picchioni, MM, McCarthy, J, Mason, FL, Dickens, GL. Predictive validity of the HCR-20 for inpatient aggression: the effect of intellectual disability on accuracy. J Intellect Disabil Res 2015; 59: 1042–54.
64 Perera, C, Simpson, N, Douds, F, Campbell, M. A survey of learning disability inpatient services in Scotland in 2007. J Intellect Disabil 2009; 13: 161–71.
65 Thomas, SD, Dolan, M, Johnston, S, Middleton, H, Harty, MA, Carlisle, J, et al. Defining the needs of patients with intellectual disabilities in the high security psychiatric hospitals in England. J Intellect Disabil Res 2004; 48: 603–10.
66 Uppal, G, McMurran, M. Recorded incidents in a high-secure hospital: a descriptive analysis. Crim Behav Ment Health 2009; 19: 265–76.
67 Mason, T. Seclusion and learning disabilities: research and deduction. Br J Dev Disabil 1996; 42: 149–59.
68 Fish, R, Lobley, J. Evaluating a forensic service for people with learning disabilities: comparing approaches. J Intellect Disabil 2001; 5: 97109.
69 Long, CG, Bell, N, Carr, A, Cairns, L, Webb, A, Collins, L. The benefits of environmental change in a secure service for people with intellectual disabilities. Adv Ment Heal Intellect Disabil 2014; 8: 309–20.
70 Langdon, PE, Swift, A, Budd, R. Social climate within secure inpatient services for people with intellectual disabilities. J Intellect Disabil Res 2006; 50: 828–36.
71 Steptoe, L, Lindsay, WR, Forrest, D, Power, M. Quality of life and relationships in sex offenders with intellectual disability. J Intellect Dev Disabil 2006; 31: 13–9.
72 Willets, L, Mooney, P, Blagden, N. Social climate in learning disability services. J Intellect Disabil Offending Behav 2014; 5: 2437.
73 Leonard, RD. Brief Symptom Inventory (BSI®). Pearson Clinical, 1993.
74 Prout, HT, Strohmer, DC. Emotional Problems Scales. Professional Manual for the Behaviour Rating Scales and Self-Report Inventory. Psychological Assessment Resources, 1991.
75 Moss, S. The Mini PAS-ADD Handbook. Pavilion, 2014.
76 Dickens, G, Sugarman, P, Walker, L. HoNOS-secure: a reliable outcome measure for users of secure and forensic mental health services. J Forens Psychiatry Psychol 2007; 18: 507–14.
77 Guy, W. ECDEU Assessment Manual for Psychopharmacology. US Department of Health, Education, and Welfare Public Health Service Alcohol, Drug Abuse, and Mental Health Administration, 1976.
78 Douglas, KS, Hart, SD, Webster, CD, Belfrage, H, Guy, LS, Wilson, CM. Historical-clinical-risk management-20, version 3 (HCR-20V3): development and overview. Int J Forensic Ment Health 2014; 13: 93108.
79 Harris, GT, Rice, ME, Camilleri, JA. Applying a forensic actuarial assessment (the violence risk appraisal guide) to non-forensic patients. J Interpers Violence 2004; 19: 1063–74.
80 Hanson, RC, Thornton, D. Static 99: Improving Actuarial Risk Assessments for Sex Offenders. In Prediction of Criminal Behaviour. Public Safety Canada, 1999.
81 Department of Health. Positive and Proactive Care: Reducing the Need for Restrictive Interventions. Department of Health, 2014.
82 Glover, G, Brown, I, Hatton, C. How psychiatric in-patient care for people with learning disabilities is transforming after Winterbourne View. Tizard Learn Disabil Rev 2014; 19: 146–9.
83 NHS England. Supporting People with a Learning Disability and/or Autism who Display Behaviour that Challenges, Including those with a Mental Health Condition. Service Model for Commissioners of Health and Social Care Services. NHS England, 2015.
84 Trout, S. National High Secure Learning Disability Service, Rampton Hospital: Service Evaluation. Patient Focus, 2011. [unpublished report].
Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

BJPsych Open
  • ISSN: -
  • EISSN: 2056-4724
  • URL: /core/journals/bjpsych-open
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×
Type Description Title
PDF
Supplementary materials

Morrissey et al. supplementary material
Supplementary Material

 PDF (140 KB)
140 KB

Metrics

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 12
Total number of PDF views: 116 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 236 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between 2nd January 2018 - 21st June 2018. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

A systematic review and synthesis of outcome domains for use within forensic services for people with intellectual disabilities

  • Catrin Morrissey (a1), Peter E. Langdon (a2), Nicole Geach (a3), Verity Chester (a4), Michael Ferriter (a5), William R. Lindsay (a6), Jane McCarthy (a7), John Devapriam (a8), Dawn-Marie Walker (a9), Conor Duggan (a10) and Regi Alexander (a11)...
Submit a response

eLetters

No eLetters have been published for this article.

×

Reply to: Submit a response


Your details


Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *