We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please 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 account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items 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 saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved 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.
Excellence is that quality that drives continuously improving outcomes for patients. Excellence must be measurable. We set out to measure excellence in forensic mental health services according to four levels of organisation and complexity (basic, standard, progressive and excellent) across seven domains: values and rights; clinical organisation; consistency; timescale; specialisation; routine outcome measures; research and development.
Aims
To validate the psychometric properties of a measurement scale to test which objective features of forensic services might relate to excellence: for example, university linkages, service size and integrated patient pathways across levels of therapeutic security.
Method
A survey instrument was devised by a modified Delphi process. Forensic leads, either clinical or academic, in 48 forensic services across 5 jurisdictions completed the questionnaire.
Results
Regression analysis found that the number of security levels, linked patient pathways, number of in-patient teams and joint university appointments predicted total excellence score.
Conclusions
Larger services organised according to stratified therapeutic security and with strong university and research links scored higher on this measure of excellence. A weakness is that these were self-ratings. Reliability could be improved with peer review and with objective measures such as quality and quantity of research output. For the future, studies are needed of the determinants of other objective measures of better outcomes for patients, including shorter lengths of stay, reduced recidivism and readmission, and improved physical and mental health and quality of life.
Delirium shares symptoms with some mental illnesses. This may lead to misdiagnosis of delirium in psychiatric patients and a risk of inadequate management. Moreover, literature on delirium in psychiatric patients is sparse. The aim was to analyse possible changes in the diagnostic incidence of delirium in psychiatric patients from 1995 to 2011, and to investigate the patients with regard to sex, age, and type of patient.
Methods
All first time ever diagnoses of delirium among psychiatric patients were identified in the nationwide Danish Psychiatric Central Research Register (DPCRR) from 1995 to 2011. The delirium diagnoses include (1) delirium unspecified, (2) delirium with dementia, and (3) drug-related delirium, all in accordance with International Classification of Diseases-10. The incidence rates were age standardised.
Results
A total of 15 680 persons diagnosed with delirium for the first time were identified in the DPCRR between 1995 and 2011. The total incidence rate of delirium has decreased, reaching 8.4/1000 person-years in 2011. In 2011, 2.6% of the demented patients were diagnosed with delirium with dementia. Diagnosis of delirium is significantly more common in men, and the three groups of delirium showed a characteristic age distribution.
Conclusion
Our incidences were markedly lower when compared with previous studies. This suggests a possible underdiagnosis of delirium in psychiatric hospitals and should be investigated further, as delirium is a serious state and identifying the syndrome is important for sufficient treatment.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.