Search results

Individuals with diagnoses of autism spectrum disorder (ASD) within criminal justice settings are a highly heterogeneous group. Although studies have examined differences between those with and without ASD in such settings, there has been no examination of differences within the ASD group. The paper aims to discuss these issues.

Drawing on the findings of a service evaluation project, this paper introduces a typology of ASD within forensic mental health and intellectual disability settings.

The eight subtypes that are described draw on clinical variables including psychopathy, psychosis and intensity/frequency of problem behaviours that co-occur with the ASD. The initial assessment of inter-rater reliability on the current version of the typology revealed excellent agreement, multirater Kfree =0.90.

The proposed typology could improve understanding of the relationship between ASD and forensic risk, identify the most appropriate interventions and provide prognostic information about length of stay. Further research to refine and validate the typology is ongoing.

This paper introduces a novel, typology-based approach which aims to better serve people with ASD within criminal justice settings.

The purpose of this paper is to provide a professional consensus position with regard to the provision of specialist inpatient rehabilitation services for people with intellectual disability (ID), autism and mental health, behavioural or forensic needs in the UK.

The concept of rehabilitation is discussed, as well as the functions and goals of specialist inpatient rehabilitation services with regard to the aforementioned contexts. Current use of rehabilitation beds is considered, both on a regional and national scale, as well as various outcome measures, including effectiveness, patient safety and patient experience.

There is a clear need for specialist inpatient rehabilitation services, though historically there have been instances of inappropriate admissions, as well as lengthy inpatient stays that could have been significantly reduced with the right type of community support package. Such services should be subjected to rigorous measurement of outcome measures, to determine that patients within such services are receiving a consistently high standard of care. Additionally, amendments to current legal frameworks should be considered, with a view to accommodating for individuals with capacity who require continuous community-based supervision.

To the best of the author’s knowledge, this is the first article detailing a professional consensus position for specialist inpatient rehabilitation services for people with ID, autism and mental health, behavioural or forensic needs.

The diagnosis of psychosis in individuals with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) poses a unique clinical challenge. The presence of intellectual disability (ID) further complicates the diagnostic picture. Reliable and timely diagnosis of psychosis in such individuals minimises the duration of untreated psychotic symptoms and the subsequent impact on the quality of life of the patients concerned. The paper aims to discuss this issue.

The authors present four patients with psychosis, ASD and ID, who have received care within forensic mental health and ID settings. These examples demonstrate the interaction between these conditions, as well as issues pertaining to diagnosis and management.

In all four patients, sustained use of antipsychotic medication was objectively associated with an improvement in psychotic symptoms and quality of life. In instances where autistic phenomena were accentuated upon development of psychosis, such features returned to the baseline levels evident prior to the onset of psychosis.

The discussion and related case examples could improve the understanding of the possibility of psychosis in individuals with ASD and ID, and increase awareness of this diagnostic possibility among healthcare professionals.

This is the first published case series illustrating the challenges of diagnosing psychosis in individuals with ASD and ID.

The purpose of this paper is to describe key policy and practice issues regarding a significant subgroup of people with intellectual disability – those with offending behaviour being treated in forensic hospitals.

The reasons why psychiatrists continue to be involved in the treatment of people with intellectual disability and mental health or behavioural problems and the factors that may lead to patients needing hospital admission are examined. Using two illustrative examples, three key questions – containment vs treatment, hospital care vs conditional discharge and hospital treatment vs using deprivation of liberty safeguards usage in the community are explored.

Patients with intellectual disability, mental health problems and offending behaviours who are treated within forensic inpatient units tend to have long lengths of stay. The key variable that mediates this length of stay is the risk that they pose to themselves or others. Clinicians work within the framework of mental health law and have to be mindful that pragmatic solutions to hasten discharge into the community may not fall within the law.

This paper makes practical suggestions for the future on how to best integrate hospital and community care for people with intellectual disability, mental health and offending behaviours.

The aim of the project was to evaluate the short‐term treatment outcomes of patients treated in a medium secure service for people with intellectual disability. A total of 138 patients, 77 discharged and 61 current inpatients, treated over a six‐year period were included in the audit. Information on demographic and clinical variables was collected on a pre‐designed data collection tool and analysed using appropriate statistical methods. The median length of stay for the discharged group was 2.8 years. About 90% of this group were discharged to lower levels of security and about a third went directly to community placements. None of the clinical and forensic factors examined was significantly associated with length of stay for this group. There was a ‘difficult to discharge long‐stay’ group which had more patients with criminal sections, restriction orders, history of abuse, fire setting, personality disorders and substance misuse. However, when regression analysis was done, most of these factors were not predictive of the length of stay. Clinical diagnosis or offending behaviour categories are poor predictors of length of hospital stay, and there is a need to identify empirically derived patient clusters using a variety of clinical and forensic variables. Common datasets and multi‐centre audits are needed to drive this.

This paper briefly reviews the literature on smoking and smoking cessation programmes for people with intellectual disability, and describes the baseline audit of such a programme for patients resident in a forensic service. The audit describes the prevalence of smoking, its significant associations and the effect of an intervention programme. In total, 79 patients participated in the audit, 48 of whom were smokers on admission (60.8%). Roughly a third of smokers gave up during their hospital stay (N = 15). Those who did not give up significantly reduced the number of cigarettes they smoked per day. Female smokers appeared less likely to give up than men. Length of stay and treatment with anti‐psychotic medication were not significantly linked to smoking behaviour. A simple smoking cessation programme with an emphasis on health education and nicotine replacement therapies appeared to be effective in cutting down smoking rates and tobacco consumption in this population. One should be cautious about generalising the conclusions to all forensic hospital services for people with intellectual disability, as the audit was limited by the lack of a control group and conducted in a single service.

There have been few studies about the prevalence of substance abuse and links to offending behaviour among those with intellectual disabilities. This paper aims to address this issue.

This baseline audit describes: the prevalence of alcohol and substance misuse in patients within a forensic intellectual disability service; and the introduction of a Drug and Alcohol Awareness Course. In total, 74 patients were included in the audit.

Roughly half of the patients audited had co‐morbid harmful use or dependence with the problem being equally prevalent in men and women. Whilst alcohol and cannabis were the commonest drugs of abuse, cocaine, stimulants and opiates were abused by a small but significant number. Of those with harmful use or dependence, 35 per cent had used the drug in the immediate lead up to their index offence. A diagnosis of personality disorder and past history of convictions for violent offences was significantly more likely to be present in the group with harmful use or dependence. There were no differences on major mental illnesses or pervasive developmental disorders.

The high prevalence of substance abuse makes it an important risk factor that could determine treatment outcomes. Forensic intellectual disability units need replicable substance abuse targeted treatment programmes that can be formally audited and evaluated.

Findings are discussed in relation to service planning and treatment outcomes from forensic intellectual disability services.

The “outcomes revolution” in healthcare has yet to impact strongly on secure intellectual disability (ID) services in the UK. The purpose of this paper is to review the service-level outcome studies that exist for this population, and to explore some of the challenges of conducting such research. It further describes some illustrative routine outcome data from the National High Secure Learning Disability Service.

Routinely collected outcome measures (length of stay; violent incidents; Emotional Problem Scale (EPS) Behaviour Rating Scale and EPS Self-Report Inventory) were analysed for two overlapping cohorts of patients resident in the high-secure service between 2008 and 2013.

The median length of stay of those discharged during the study period (n=27) was around 9.9 years (range one to 40 years). A significant proportion (25 per cent) of discharges resulted in an eventual return to high security. There did not appear to be a treatment effect over two to three years using staff-rated global clinical measures, but patient-rated clinical measures did reduce. Violent incidents also reduced significantly over a longer period of four years in treatment.

There are identified challenges to research design and outcome measurement which need to be addressed in any future cross-service studies.

There are relatively few published outcome studies from forensic ID services. None of the studies have used clinical measures of changes or patient-rated outcome measures.

This survey describes the socio‐demographic, clinical and forensic variables of all patients referred to a medium secure unit in the psychiatry of learning disability. Of the sample, 67.5% were referred following an index offence and 76.6% had at least one previous conviction. Just over half (50.6%) came from either prisons, special hospitals or medium secure units and the remainder from mental health/learning disability hospitals or community resources. The majority (91.7%) had prior contact with a mental health or learning disability team. Most (81.5%) had a mild or ‘borderline’ learning disability, 46.8% had either a psychosis or major mood disorder, 58.4% had personality disorders and 56.6% had a history of illicit substance abuse. Of the 79 referrals 29.1% were accepted for admission. Arson as an index offence and a previous conviction for arson were significantly associated with being accepted for admission.