Interrater reliability of the violence risk assessment checklist for youth: a case vignette study.

BACKGROUND: Facilities providing health- and social services for youth are commonly faced with the need for assessment and management of violent behavior. These providers often experience shortage of resources, compromising the feasibility of conducting comprehensive violence risk assessments. The Violence Risk Assessment Checklist for Youth aged 12-18 (V-RISK-Y) is a 12-item violence risk screening instrument developed to rapidly identify youth at high risk for violent behavior in situations requiring expedient evaluation of violence risk. The V-RISK-Y instrument was piloted in acute psychiatric units for youth, yielding positive results of predictive validity. The aim of the present study was to assess the interrater reliability of V-RISK-Y in child and adolescent psychiatric units and acute child protective services institutions. METHODS: A case vignette study design was utilized to assess interrater reliability of V-RISK-Y. Staff at youth facilities (N = 163) in Norway and Sweden scored V-RISK-Y for three vignettes, and interrater reliability was assessed with the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). RESULTS: Results indicate good interrater reliability for the sum score and Low-Moderate-High risk level appraisal across staff from the different facilities and professions. For single items, interrater reliability ranged from poor to excellent. CONCLUSIONS: This study is an important step in establishing the psychometric properties of V-RISK-Y. Findings support the structured professional judgment tradition the instrument is based on, with high agreement on the overall risk assessment. This study had a case vignette design, and the next step is to assess the reliability and validity of V-RISK-Y in naturalistic settings.

Comparison of V-RISK-Y and V-RISK-10 for risk of violence: A one-year study from a psychiatric emergency department for adolescents.

There has been a lack of short and simple screening instruments to assess the risk of violence in youth. Many acute youth departments have used the V-RISK-10, a risk screener for adults. V-RISK-Y is a risk screener based on the V-RISK-10 and adapted to youths. Our aim was to compare the predictive validity between V-RISK-Y and VRISK-10 in an emergency psychiatric adolescent ward. Target population were all 92 patients admitted within one year, and study population consisted of 49 (53 %) patients who had completed data. V-RISK-10 and V-RISK-Y were scored at admission and compared with recorded episodes of violence during the hospitalization. V-RISK-Y showed higher AUC values for recorded violence and some of the individual items also showed better results. Most differences were not significant, but results may still be of clinical interest.