Forensic Neurology and the Role of Neurologists in Forensic Evaluations.

There is a clear need for experts with the requisite knowledge and experience to offer medicolegal opinions pertaining to various neuropsychiatric conditions. There is also an important distinction between clinical and medicolegal roles, and the need for training and expertise applicable to forensic assessment. But there remain few available experts with credentials spanning neuropsychiatry and forensic assessment. This creates a dilemma whereby parties involved in litigation featuring neuropsychiatric illness or injury are frequently forced to choose between experts with either knowledge and skills applicable to neuropsychiatric conditions or experts with skills and experience applicable to forensic assessment. Either choice introduces risk. Whether flawed medicolegal opinions are a consequence of deficient medical knowledge or an inadequate forensic evaluation process, the result remains the same, with triers of fact potentially being exposed to problematic testimony. There is, however, a more fundamental problem that implicates patient care more broadly: spurious dichotomies created by the historical segregation of psychiatry and neurology. Optimizing clinical care for patients with neuropsychiatric conditions, improving medical education in support of such care, and enabling forensic neuropsychiatric assessment must then start with more proactive efforts to reintegrate psychiatry and neurology.

Increasing the Acceptability of Lethal Means Safety Counseling for Firearms: Tips and Scripts.

In lethal means safety counseling (LMSC), clinicians encourage patients to limit their access to common and lethal means of suicide, especially firearms. However, previous studies have shown that clinicians may hesitate to deliver this evidence-based intervention, in part because of concerns that patients might not find such discussions acceptable. Based on a published review of 18 qualitative studies examining diverse perspectives on LMSC, we discuss strategies that may help clinicians increase the acceptability of LMSC among their patients and present supporting scripts, rationales, and resources. The studies included in the review examined the perspectives of clinicians, patients, firearm owners, and other relevant groups across a wide range of clinical settings on LMSC for firearms. The authors of these studies recommend that clinicians approach LMSC in a nonjudgmental manner with awareness of their own biases, demonstrate cultural competency by acknowledging the role of firearms in patients' lives, and adapt LMSC to patients' previous experiences with firearms, safety, and injury. Clinicians may also want to contextualize and provide a rationale for LMSC, decide whether or not to directly ask about access to firearms, and recommend a range of storage options tailored to the patient. Free locking devices or discount coupons for purchasing such devices may increase the acceptability and efficacy of these discussions. The strategies recommended in this paper are the first to be based on a comprehensive set of relevant studies. Future research is needed to examine whether these strategies do in fact increase the acceptability of LMSC and promote other outcomes such as increased feasibility and efficacy.

Psychiatric Screening Measures in Behavioral Variant Frontotemporal Dementia.

OBJECTIVE: Behavioral variant frontotemporal dementia (bvFTD) is sometimes misdiagnosed as a primary psychiatric disorder, such as major depressive disorder, bipolar disorder, an anxiety disorder, autism spectrum disorder (ASD), or attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Nonspecialists often use screening measures for primary psychiatric disorders in early assessments of persons with bvFTD. The investigators aimed to evaluate the manifestations of bvFTD in surveys intended to screen for primary psychiatric disorders. METHODS: Patients with bvFTD (N=27) presenting to an academic neurobehavior specialty clinic and their caregivers were provided questionnaire packets including the Mood Disorder Questionnaire (MDQ), the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9), the Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 scale (GAD-7), the Adult ADHD Self-Report Scale, version 1.1, the Ritvo Autism and Asperger Diagnostic Scale, and the Neuropsychiatric Inventory Questionnaire. Established cutoff scores suggesting the presence of a primary psychiatric disorder were used to define a "positive" response. Individual questions from each screening questionnaire were examined for a more granular characterization of bvFTD. RESULTS: Overall, 15% of bvFTD patients screened positive for bipolar disorder, 54% screened positive for ADHD, and 89% screened positive for ASD. Hyperactivity or hypersensitivity symptoms were infrequently endorsed. In addition, 57% of respondents screened positive for depressive symptoms on the PHQ-9, and 43% screened positive for anxiety symptoms on the GAD-7. CONCLUSIONS: The use of cutoff scores on screening measures for primary psychiatric disorders resulted in potentially problematic positive screens of primary psychiatric disorders among persons with bvFTD. Identifying specific questions that distinguish between bvFTD and primary psychiatric disorders requires further study.

Extreme Risk Protection Orders: Legislative Intent and Clinician Guidance.

In this second column of a 2-part series exploring extreme risk protections orders, we utilize recent events in Colorado, including legislative efforts to expand the list of eligible petitioners to include clinicians, as an opportunity to explore questions and challenges faced by mental health and medical professionals serving in this capacity. Clinicians are in need of more clear guidance, given an emerging role that comes without clear evidence or practice standards to inform individualized clinical decision-making, and which potentially pits public safety interests against patient care needs, especially those pertaining to therapeutic relationships. In the interim, clinicians will best serve their patients by continuing to practice in a fashion that is analogous to decision-making around other interventions with serious implications for patient autonomy such as involuntary hospitalization. Ongoing collaboration with legislators is needed to arrive at laws that are informed by the limitations inherent in clinical risk assessment and that can be translated into clinical practices that simultaneously support patient needs and community safety.

Lithium Use for Suicide Prevention, Revisited.

The literature on lithium's role in suicide prevention is rife with competing interpretations and diverging opinions, in part stemming from the complexity of the underlying literature base. Conclusions that lithium unequivocally offers suicide prevention benefits do not appear warranted based on the strength of existing studies. Given the evidence along with the indisputable risks associated with lithium (especially in overdose), and the need for sustained therapeutic dosing to achieve any theoretical antisuicide benefit, it seems evident that any potential role for lithium in suicide prevention is far narrower than originally hypothesized. As such, the goal of this article is to provide an evidence-informed, therapeutic risk management approach to clinical decision-making concerning the use of lithium for suicide prevention to ensure that such prescribing is done in a patient-centered fashion that mitigates, to the extent possible, the potential risks of lithium use. This includes a review of potential justifications for not employing lithium for suicide prevention, given the recommendations in the existing guidelines. Clinicians should approach this clinical decision in an individualized fashion with full consideration of the potential risks associated with lithium use and availability, as well as potential alternative treatment options. An individualized risk/benefit analysis must also take into consideration the presence of comorbid conditions; the acuity of suicide risk, and any history of self-directed violence, with special attention to suicide attempts via overdose; treatment adherence, past and present; the presence and/or strength of a therapeutic relationship; and other viable treatment options.

Forensic Mental Health Assessment as a Critical Intercept for Enhancing Mental Health Care.

Rates of psychiatric diagnosis, medical morbidity, and suicide risk are notably high among incarcerated individuals. However, engaging these individuals in community-based health care settings can be a challenge. Among justice-involved individuals who do access services, community-based health care settings may lack available resources to effectively conduct comprehensive assessments that inform evidence-based conceptualization. We propose forensic mental health assessment (FMHA) as a critical opportunity to enhance service delivery for this at-risk population. In particular, within the scope of their role, forensic mental health evaluators are able to conduct a comprehensive review of records across health (eg, inpatient and outpatient health care settings), social (eg, homeless shelter), and correctional (eg, jail or prison) settings. Moreover, FMHA often includes specialized batteries that are able to assess and differentially diagnose myriad clinical presentations that may have overlapping symptomatology. We present 2 case vignettes to illustrate the utility of FMHA for enhancing service delivery. Finally, we conclude by noting challenges to integrating FMHA into conceptualization and necessary next steps in research and programing.

Firearm Injury Prevention and Extreme Risk Protection Orders.

Extreme risk protection orders (ERPOs) represent a potential mechanism to facilitate firearm-related lethal means safety. ERPOs are a legal mechanism that enables law enforcement to temporarily remove firearms from, and prevent firearm purchase by, an individual who presents a significant danger to self or others, as determined by a court of law. While few jurisdictions currently allow mental health professionals to initiate ERPO petitions, it nonetheless seems important that clinicians be familiar with ERPOs, as clinicians may still serve an important role in disseminating information and facilitating judicious petitions. However, ERPO laws remain quite new, and the implications for mental health professionals when participating (directly or indirectly) in ERPOs remain unclear. This column introduces readers to ERPOs and offers resources to learn more about how ERPOs work across various jurisdictions.

Suicide and Life Insurance.

Much has been written about the history of suicide and, notably, about societies that condemned both the act and the actor, resulting in a perpetuation of suicide being stigmatized in many cultures. One aspect of this perceived stigmatization involves exclusionary clauses in life insurance policies that reject paying benefits to survivor-beneficiaries of the decedent if the decedent has died by suicide within a prescribed time frame. From the perspective of the individual, life insurance is designed to protect the estate of a decedent from a significant financial burden. From the insurer's perspective, there are essentially 2 reasons for having a suicide exclusion clause: limiting risk and preventing or discouraging fraud. This column examines these rationales in light of the estimated few suicides that do occur during exclusionary clause time frames. Observations are made about the effect of these clauses on those impacted by the loss of a loved one who died by suicide within the exclusionary time frame. An examination of the perspectives of both the life insurance industry and the impacted survivors of suicide decedents raises questions about what are reasonable and appropriate exclusionary clause time frames that protect both the insurer and survivor-beneficiaries. The forensic expert consulting on such cases should be cognizant of these competing perspectives and engage in therapeutic assessment whenever possible, identifying opportunities to promote thoughtful suicide postvention.

Therapeutic Risk Management and Firearm-related Lethal Means Safety.

Safety planning to reduce suicide or other-directed violence risk involves efforts toward "making the environment safe," including working collaboratively with at-risk patients to encourage voluntary changes in their firearm storage decisions [ie, lethal means safety (LMS) counseling]. This column provides a conceptual framework and real-world evidence to support the delivery of LMS counseling to at-risk patients, as well as guidance on asking about firearm access and making individualized safety recommendations. It also reviews important elements related to documenting LMS discussions and legal considerations related to these conversations.

Therapeutic Risk Management for Violence: Safety Planning for Other-directed Violence.

Therapeutic management of risk for other-directed violence (ODV) involves screening, assessment, and clinically appropriate intervention. In this 5-part series, effective screening and assessment for ODV have been described as a combination of clinical interviewing and the use of structured tools to inform clinical impressions of both acute and chronic risk for violence. Once risk of violence is identified, therapeutic management of the risk throughout the course of treatment is best achieved by determining the function of the violent ideation and behavior. This can be achieved through the use of functional chain analysis. Chain analysis not only serves the purpose of providing insight into the contingencies of violent behavior but also helps to identify target areas of intervention where other skills, strategies, and means to access resources for support can be applied. In this fifth and final column of the series, we describe an intervention with all of these outcomes as its goals. A safety plan for ODV assists both clients and mental health professionals in disrupting patterns of violent ideation or behavior that would otherwise continue causing not only harm to others but prolonged negative consequences for those engaging in such behaviors.

Therapeutic Risk Management for Violence: Chain Analysis of Other-directed Violent Ideation and Behavior.

Violence risk assessment is a requisite component of mental health treatment. Adhering to standards of care and ethical and legal requirements necessitates a cogent process for conducting, and then documenting, other-directed violence (ODV) risk screening, assessment, and management. In this 5-part series, we describe a model for achieving therapeutic risk management of the potentially violent patient, with essential elements involving: clinical interview augmented by structured screening or assessment tools; risk stratification in terms of temporality and severity; chain analysis to intervene on the functions of ODV ideation and behavior; and a personalized safety plan to mitigate/manage risk. In this fourth column of the series, we describe chain analysis as a critical tool for assessing and intervening on ODV ideation and behavior. We identify the pathways of reinforcement that can cause ODV to persist, and how to navigate potential barriers to completing ODV chains. Using a case example, we demonstrate how to apply chain analysis to ODV ideation and behavior and offer interventional strategies that can be used to disrupt the chain and ultimately reduce the risk for violence.

Facilitating Successful Reentry Among Justice-involved Veterans: The Role of Veteran and Offender Identity.

Reentry courts facilitate successful offender reintegration into the community following release from incarceration, and many justice-involved veterans may benefit from such services given their elevated risk for deleterious outcomes postrelease. However, effectively engaging court participants is a crucial foundation to achieve the goals of recidivism reduction and global psychosocial improvement. This conceptual article presents an overview of factors that may interfere with a veteran's engagement in reentry court through the lens of both veteran and offender identity. Recommendations for reentry court personnel based on justice-involved veterans' experiences, identity, and unique needs are presented. Careful consideration of these factors and associated practice adaptations may facilitate rapport between reentry court personnel and veteran participants, foster engagement, and ultimately improve outcomes among this unique, at-risk population.

Rivastigmine Transdermal Patch Treatment for Moderate to Severe Cognitive Impairment in Veterans with Traumatic Brain Injury (RiVET Study): A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Cognitive impairment is common in veterans with histories of traumatic brain injury (TBI). Cholinergic deficits have been hypothesized as contributors to this impairment. We report the effects of cholinesterase inhibitor rivastigmine transdermal patch treatment in veterans with TBI and post-traumatic memory impairment. Our objective was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of a 9.5 mg/24 h (10 cm2) rivastigmine patch in veterans of military conflicts with persistent moderate to severe memory impairment at least 12 weeks after TBI. This randomized, outpatient, double-blind, placebo-controlled 12-week trial with an exploratory double-blind phase of an additional 14 weeks was conducted at 5 VA Medical Centers, among veterans with closed, non-penetrating TBI who met or exceeded modified American Congress of Rehabilitation Medicine criteria for mild TBI with verbal memory deficits, as assessed by the Hopkins Verbal Learning Test, Revised (HVLT-R). Patients were randomized 1:1 to rivastigmine or matching placebo patches after a 1-week single-blind, placebo run-in phase. At randomization, patients received 4.6 mg/24 h rivastigmine patches or matching placebo increased to a 9.5 mg/24 h patch after 4 weeks. The primary efficacy outcome measure was the proportion of participants who had at least a five-word improvement on the HVLT-R Total Recall Index (Trials 1-3). A total of 3671 participants were pre-screened, of whom 257 (7.0%) were screened; 96 (37%) randomized, and 94 included in study analyses. Responder rates were 40.8% (20 of 49) and 51.1% (23 of 45) in the rivastigmine and placebo groups, respectively (p = 0.41). A mixed-effect model including treatment, time, and treatment-by-time interaction indicated no significant difference in treatment effect over time between the groups (p = 0.24). Overall, there were no significant differences in changes for all secondary outcomes between the rivastigmine and placebo groups. The most commonly observed adverse events were application site reactions. This trial provides the largest sample to date of veterans with TBI and post-traumatic memory deficits enrolled in a pharmacological trial. Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01670526.

Therapeutic Risk Management for Violence: Stratifying Risk and Characterizing Violence.

Violence risk assessment is a requisite component of mental health treatment. Adhering to standards of care and ethical and legal requirements necessitates a cogent process for conducting, and then documenting, other-directed violence risk screening, assessment, and management. In this 5-part series, we describe a model for achieving therapeutic risk management of the potentially violent patient, with essential elements involving: clinical interview augmented by structured screening or assessment tools; risk stratification in terms of temporality and severity; chain analysis to intervene on the functions of violent ideation and behavior; and personalized safety plans to mitigate/manage risk. This third column in the series describes other-directed violence risk stratification in terms of both severity and temporality, as well an approach for characterizing (ie, predatory/planned or impulsive/reactive) the violence risk posed by an individual.

Evaluation of an Immunomodulatory Probiotic Intervention for Veterans With Co-occurring Mild Traumatic Brain Injury and Posttraumatic Stress Disorder: A Pilot Study.

Background: US military Veterans returned from Operation Enduring Freedom/Operation Iraqi Freedom/Operation New Dawn (OEF/OIF/OND) with symptoms associated with mild traumatic brain injury [mTBI; i.e., persistent post-concussive (PPC) symptoms] and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Interventions aimed at addressing symptoms associated with both physical and psychological stressors (e.g., PPC and PTSD symptoms) are needed. This study was conducted to assess the feasibility, acceptability, and safety of a probiotic intervention, as well as to begin the process of evaluating potential biological outcomes. Methods: A pilot randomized controlled trial was implemented among US military Veterans from recent conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan. Those enrolled had clinically significant PPC and PTSD symptoms. Participants were randomized to intervention (Lactobacillus reuteri DSM 17938) or placebo supplementation (daily for 8 weeks +/- 2 weeks) at a 1:1 ratio, stratified by irritable bowel syndrome status. Thirty-one Veterans were enrolled and randomized (15 to the placebo condition and 16 to the probiotic condition). Results: Thresholds for feasibility, acceptability, and safety were met. Probiotic supplementation resulted in a decrease in plasma C-reactive protein (CRP) concentrations relative to the placebo group that approached statistical significance (p = 0.056). Although during the Trier Social Stress Test (TSST; administered post-supplementation) no between-group differences were found on a subjective measure of stress responsivity (Visual Analog Scale), there was a significantly larger increase in mean heart beats per minute between baseline and the math task for the placebo group as compared with the probiotic group (estimated mean change, probiotic 5.3 [95% Confidence Interval: -0.55, 11.0], placebo 16.9 [11.0, 22.7], p = 0.006). Conclusions: Findings from this trial support the feasibility, acceptability, and safety of supplementation with an anti-inflammatory/immunoregulatory probiotic, L. reuteri DSM 17938, among Veterans with PPC and PTSD symptoms. Moreover, results suggest that CRP may be a viable inflammatory marker of interest. A larger randomized controlled trial aimed at measuring both biological and clinical outcomes is indicated. Clinical Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, Identifier NCT02723344.

Therapeutic Risk Management for Violence: Augmenting Clinical Risk Assessment With Structured Instruments.

Violence risk assessment is a requisite component of mental health treatment. Adhering to standards of care and ethical and legal requirements necessitates a cogent process for conducting, and then documenting, other-directed violence risk screening, assessment, and management. In this 5-part series, we describe a model for achieving therapeutic risk management of the potentially violent patient, with essential elements involving: clinical interview augmented by structured screening or assessment tools; risk stratification in terms of temporality and severity; chain analysis to intervene on the functions of violent ideation and behavior; and a personalized safety plan to mitigate/manage risk. This second column in the series describes the advantages of, and offers suggestions for, incorporating structured tools into violence risk assessment.

Therapeutic Risk Management for Violence: Clinical Risk Assessment.

Violence risk assessment is a requisite component of mental health treatment. Adhering to standards of care and ethical and legal requirements necessitates a cogent process for conducting (and documenting) screening, assessment, and management of other-directed violence risk. In this 5-part series, we describe a model for achieving therapeutic risk management of the potentially violent patient, with essential elements involving a clinical interview augmented by structured screening or assessment tools; risk stratification in terms of temporality and severity; chain analysis to intervene on the functions of violent ideation and behavior; and development of a personalized safety plan. This first column of the series focuses on essential aspects of the clinical interview.

A model for intervening with veterans and service members who are concerned about developing Chronic Traumatic Encephalopathy (CTE).

OBJECTIVE: This paper briefly reviews what is unknown about chronic traumatic encephalopathy (CTE), highlights understandable concerns by individuals with a history of mild traumatic brain injuries who present to neuropsychologists with fears about a deteriorating course and eventual dementia due to CTE, and proposes a three-phased model for intervening with such individuals. METHOD: The proposed model includes three phases - (1) assessment and education, (2) targeted interventions for specific symptoms and comorbidities (e.g., sleep disturbance, headache, depression), and (3) psychotherapy to address mental health issues. While this is generally the order in which they will occur, the approach is not necessarily linear but rather provides a recommended schema. CONCLUSION: Media attention on concussion has greatly increased in the last several years, as interest in the possible contribution of concussion(s) to CTE grows. This media attention has some adverse effects in that it creates a false perception about the current state of the science and may engender iatrogenic effects. The proposed model is offered as one approach to engage patients within this context.