Search results

The purpose of this paper is to gather epidemiologicalinformation concerning firesetters with intellectual disabilities (ID) in Denmark to identify the assessment and treatment needs of this population and inform further research in this area.

The records held by the Danish Ministry of Justice concerning all firesetters with ID convicted of deliberate firesetting were reviewed for the period January 2001 to December 2010 inclusive. File information was extracted for 83 offenders concerning: demographic and personal characteristics; mental health characteristics; offending behaviour; offence-specific factors; and motives for offending. A sub-group of seven offenders were interviewed to explore some of the themes that emerged from the file review.

The majority of study participants were male and were classified as having mild ID and around 50 per cent had additional mental health problems. Many came from disturbed and deprived backgrounds. Two-thirds had set more than one fire and over 60 per cent had convictions for offences other than firesetting. Alcohol was involved in the firesetting behaviour in a significant proportion of cases (25 per cent). The motives for setting fires were – in descending order – communication (of anger, frustration and distress), fire fascination and vandalism. Interviews with participants indicated the important communicative function of firesetting, the difficulties people had in talking about and acknowledging their firesetting behaviour, and lack of access to targeted interventions.

Interventions for Danish firesetters with ID, as for firesetters with ID elsewhere, need to target the communicative function of this behaviour, along with offenders’ lack of insight and initial reluctance to accept responsibility for their behaviour and associated risks. Adjunctive treatment is required to address the psychiatric comorbidity experienced by many of these offenders, along with the alcohol use/misuse that is associated with many of these offences.

This is the first study concerning nature and needs of firesetters with ID in Denmark.

Persons with intellectual disabilities (ID) who offend are treated differently depending on the national jurisdiction. Norway and Denmark are two such examples. The differences in care models may also have an impact on staff perspectives. This paper aims to study the differences between Norwegian and Danish staff members within secure forensic ID services.

A cross-sectional study involving Norwegian (n = 145) and Danish staff (n = 279) in secure forensic learning disabilities services was conducted. The response rates were 50% in Denmark (n = 147) and 69% in Norway (n = 98), respectively. An electronic survey covering five sets of topics (demographic characteristics, working conditions, workplace culture, work motivation and work resilience) was used. The findings was statistically analysed using SPSS.

This study confirmed that staff in the two neighbouring countries have common conceptions of their employment. Danish staff were more exposed to violent incidents (t = 4.1(237); p < 0.001). There was greater concern with workplace safety in Denmark (t = 5.2(237); p < 0.001) compared to more team-based and rigid working conditions in Norway (t = −2.6(237); p < 0.01).

These differences are discussed in relation to some important national differences in a professional culture, educational systems, service organisation and legal issues that possibly add realistic explanations to the findings.

The purpose of this paper is to understand how staff at various levels perceive and understand hospital accreditation generally and in relation to quality improvement (QI) specifically.

In a newly accredited Danish hospital, the authors conducted semi-structured interviews to capture broad ranging experiences. Medical doctors, nurses, a quality coordinator and a quality department employee participated. Interviews were audio recorded and subjected to framework analysis.

Staff reported that The Danish Healthcare Quality Programme affected management priorities: office time and working on documentation, which reduced time with patients and on improvement activities. Organisational structures were improved during preparation for accreditation. Staff perceived that the hospital was better prepared for new QI initiatives after accreditation; staff found disease specific requirements unnecessary. Other areas benefited from accreditation. Interviewees expected that organisational changes, owing to accreditation, would be sustained and that the QI focus would continue.

Accreditation is a critical and complete hospital review, including areas that often are neglected. Accreditation dominates hospital agendas during preparation and surveyor visits, potentially reducing patient care and other QI initiatives. Improvements are less likely to occur in areas that other QI initiatives addressed. Yet, accreditation creates organisational foundations for future QI initiatives.

The authors study contributes new insights into how hospital staff at different organisational levels perceive and understand accreditation.