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

Catrin Morrissey; Peter E. Langdon; Nicole Geach; Verity Chester; Michael Ferriter; William R. Lindsay; Jane McCarthy; John Devapriam; Dawn-Marie Walker; Conor Duggan; Regi Alexander

doi:10.1192/bjpo.bp.116.003616

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

Catrin Morrissey, Peter E. Langdon, Nicole Geach, Verity Chester, Michael Ferriter, William R. Lindsay, Jane McCarthy, John Devapriam, Dawn-Marie Walker, Conor Duggan, Regi Alexander

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

23 Citations (Scopus)

22 Downloads (Pure)

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.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	41-56
Journal	BJPsych Open
Volume	3
Issue number	1
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1192/bjpo.bp.116.003616
Publication status	Published - 13 Feb 2017

Access to Document

10.1192/bjpo.bp.116.003616Licence: CC BY

Published manuscript
© 2017 The Royal College of Psychiatrists. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Final published version, 329 KBLicence: CC BY

http://bjpo.rcpsych.org/lookup/doi/10.1192/bjpo.bp.116.003616Licence: CC BY

Cite this

@article{efd62c26b3d142e99a9292f0b7186070,

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

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.",

author = "Catrin Morrissey and Langdon, {Peter E.} and Nicole Geach and Verity Chester and Michael Ferriter and Lindsay, {William R.} and Jane McCarthy and John Devapriam and Dawn-Marie Walker and Conor Duggan and Regi Alexander",

year = "2017",

month = feb,

day = "13",

doi = "10.1192/bjpo.bp.116.003616",

language = "English",

volume = "3",

pages = "41--56",

journal = "BJPsych Open",

issn = "2056-4724",

publisher = "Cambridge University Press",

number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - A systematic review and synthesis of outcome domains for use within forensic services for people with intellectual disabilities

AU - Morrissey, Catrin

AU - Langdon, Peter E.

AU - Geach, Nicole

AU - Chester, Verity

AU - Ferriter, Michael

AU - Lindsay, William R.

AU - McCarthy, Jane

AU - Devapriam, John

AU - Walker, Dawn-Marie

AU - Duggan, Conor

AU - Alexander, Regi

PY - 2017/2/13

Y1 - 2017/2/13

N2 - 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.

AB - 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.

U2 - 10.1192/bjpo.bp.116.003616

DO - 10.1192/bjpo.bp.116.003616

M3 - Article

VL - 3

SP - 41

EP - 56

JO - BJPsych Open

JF - BJPsych Open

SN - 2056-4724

IS - 1

ER -