[Preventing violence during hospitalisations in psychiatry]. / Prévenir les moments de violence lors des hospitalisations en psychiatrie.

Over recent years, the psychiatric sector has endeavoured to develop community-based care. Paradoxically, the number of compulsory hospitalisations is increasing. At the same time, the legal framework is evolving and measures relating to the deprivation of liberty in the context of psychiatric care have given rise to extensive guidelines. The work of the French National Health Authority represents, in this context, a certain continuity, with regard to the legal, ethical and social discussions around restriction of liberty practices within psychiatric units. The main focus is on the prevention and management of violent outbursts.

[The latest best practice guidelines relating to seclusion and restraint]. / Les dernières recommandations de bonnes pratiques sur l'isolement et la contention.

Several measures relating to seclusion and restraint are included in the French public health code. The best practice guidelines of the French National Health Authority, published in 2017, define these two notions and advise on the behaviour to adopt with regard to their implementation and monitoring. Likewise, informing and supporting the patient when these measures are lifted are critical moments which the teams must also be able to manage correctly.

[Study of population profiles in relation to the level of suicide risk in France: Study "Mental health in the general population"]. / Etude des profils de population selon le niveau de risque suicidaire en France : Enquête "santé mentale en population générale".

Suicidal behaviour is a very important public health issue. The French study of mental health in the general population casts a whole new insight on this issue thanks to the size of the sample used, to its representative nature and to the variety of the collected data. This study aims at defining better the relationships between the factors of suicide risk within a noninstitutionalized adult population and more specifically between the socioeconomic and the psychopathological factors. The final aim is to help define the intervention strategies which should be developed in the context of prevention programs. The method used consists in estimating the suicide risk for each person included in the study by developing a standardized indicator. Six questions taken from the MINI (Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview) were used to define the four levels of suicide risks which compose this indicator. Next, this indicator was matched for the socioeconomic variables of the study as well as for the main psychopathological categories. A factor analysis of the numerous relations was then carried out. Its principle consisted in synthesizing the information contained in a great number of variables and individuals thanks to the mathematical projection of these features onto a graph. The variables which were retained for the analysis were those which presented the richest relationship with the main variable.(that is to say the level of suicide risk). The estimated prevalence rate of suicidal risk in the general population (with at least one positive answer) is 13.7% which can be divided into 9.7% of low risk, 2.1% of medium risk and 1.9% of high risk. The relationship between the presence of a psychopathology and a medium or high risk of suicide is quite significant. What is more, the presence of associated pathologies (comorbidities) increases the risk. The highest prevalence of risk is observed in psychotic and depressive disorders. However, suicide risk exists in some people who do not present any detected psychopathology : the statistical analysis reveals an excessive medium and high suicide risk in relation to a low family income, unemployment, separation and the 18 to 24 age group. The multidimensional analysis brings to light several specific aspects : the principal explanation shows a relationship between unfavourable socio economic status and the presence of suicide risk at a level which is not equal to zero. The second explanatory line defines the level of risk according to the principal psychopathological characteristics. These two lines define a plane which enables to differentiate low risk groups from medium risk groups and high risk groups. The latter consists mainly in isolated pathological factors or associated factors (comorbidities). The medium and high risk groups are composed mainly of the combination of the two variables. To conclude, these results - which are necessarily flimsy since they are based on epidemiological and statistical analysis - do however match up with the data of the epidemiologic literature in an interesting way and raise the question of an intervention and prevention strategy that would integrate better the medical factors and the socio economic aspects into its program. They should be completed by targeted forward clinical studies as well as by more precise epidemiological patterns.