Skip to main content
×
×
Home

Use and perceived utility of structured violence risk assessments in English medium secure forensic units

  • Reena Khiroya (a1), Tim Weaver (a2) and Tony Maden (a3)
Abstract
Aims and Method

We surveyed the usage and perceived utility of standardised risk measures in 29 forensic medium secure units (a 62% response rate).

Results

The most common instruments were Historical Clinical Risk–20 (HCR–20) and Psychopathy Checklist – revised (PCL–R); both were rated highly for utility. the Risk Matrix 2000 (RM2000), Sex Offender Risk Appraisal Guide (SORAG) and Static-99 were the most common sex offender assessments, but the Sexual Violence Risks–20 (SVR–20) was rated more positively for its use of dynamic factors and relevance to treatment.

Clinical Implications

Most medium secure units use structured risk assessments and staff view them positively. As HCR–20 and PCL–R/PCL–SV (Psychopathy Checklist – Screening Version) are so widely used they should be the first choices considered by other services.

  • 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.

      Use and perceived utility of structured violence risk assessments in English medium secure forensic units
      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.

      Use and perceived utility of structured violence risk assessments in English medium secure forensic units
      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.

      Use and perceived utility of structured violence risk assessments in English medium secure forensic units
      Available formats
      ×
Copyright
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
References
Hide All
Boer, D., Hart, S., Kropp, P., et al (1997) Manual for the Sexual Violence Risk–20. Mental Health, Law, and Policy Institute at Simon Fraser University.
Department of Health (2007) Best Practice in Managing Risk: Principles and Guidance for Best Practice in the Assessment and Management of Risk to Self and Others in Mental Health Services. Department of Health (http://www.dh.gov.uk/en/Publicationsandstatistics/Publications/PublicationsPolicyAndGuidance/DH_076511).
Doyle, M. & Dolan, M. (2006) Predicting community violence from patients discharged from mental health services. British Journal of Psychiatry, 189, 520526.
Hanson, R. K. (1997) The Development of a Brief Actuarial Risk Scale for Sexual Offender Recidivism. Department of the Solicitor General of Canada.
Hare, R. D. (1991) Manual for the Hare Psychopathy Checklist–Revised. Multi-Health Systems.
Hart, S., Cox, D. & Hare, R. (1995) The Hare Psychopathy Checklist: Screening Version. Multi-Health Systems.
Hart, S. D., Michie, C. & Cooke, D. J. (2007) Precision of actuarial risk assessment instruments. Evaluating the ‘margins of error’ of group v. individual predictions of violence. British Journal of Psychiatry, 190 (Suppl. 49), s60s65.
Monahan, J., Steadman, H. J., Robbins, P. C., et al. (2000) Developing a clinically useful actuarial tool for assessing violence risk. British Journal of Psychiatry, 176, 312319.
Monahan, J., Steadman, H. J., Silver, E., et al. (2001) Rethinking Risk Assessment: the MacArthur Study of Mental Disorder and Violence. Oxford University Press.
Morgan, J. F. (2007) ‘Giving up the Culture of Blame’: Risk Assessment and Risk Management in Psychiatric Practice. Royal College of Psychiatrists (http://www.rcpsych.ac.uk/PDF/Risk%20Assessment%20Paper%20-%20Giving%20up%20the%20Culture%20of%20Blame.pdf).
O'ROURKE, M. M. (1995) The Risk Assessment and Management Schedule: Users Manual. Heathlands Mental Health Trust.
Quinsey, V., Harris, G., Rice, M., et al (1998) Violent Offenders: Appraising and Managing Risk. American Psychological Association.
Taylor, R. (1999) Predicting reconvictions for sexual and violent offences using the revised offender group reconviction scale. Home Office.
Thornton, D., Mann, R., Webster, S., et al (2003) Distinguishing and combining risks for sexual and violent recidivism. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 989, 225235.
Webster, C. D., Douglas, K. S., Eaves, D., et al. (1997) HCR–20. Assessing Risk for Violence, Version 2. Mental Health, Law and Policy Institute, Simon Fraser University.
Webster, C. D., Martin, M., Brink, J., et al (2004) Short-Term Assessment of Risk and Treatability (START). St Joseph's Healthcare, Hamilton and British Columbia Mental Health and Addiction Services.
Recommend this journal

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

BJPsych Bulletin
  • ISSN: 0955-6036
  • EISSN: 1472-1473
  • URL: /core/journals/bjpsych-bulletin
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×
Type Description Title
UNKNOWN
Supplementary materials

Khiroya et al. supplementary material
Supplementary Material

 Unknown (447 bytes)
447 bytes
PDF
Supplementary materials

Khiroya et al. supplementary material
Supplementary Material

 PDF (55 KB)
55 KB

Metrics

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 51 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 122 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between 2nd January 2018 - 23rd July 2018. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Use and perceived utility of structured violence risk assessments in English medium secure forensic units

  • Reena Khiroya (a1), Tim Weaver (a2) and Tony Maden (a3)
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? *