A realist evaluation of an enhanced court-based liaison and diversion service for defendants with neurodevelopmental disorders.

BACKGROUND: In England, court-based mental health liaison and diversion (L&D) services work across courts and police stations to support those with severe mental illness and other vulnerabilities. However, the evidence around how such services support those with neurodevelopmental disorders (NDs) is limited. AIMS: This study aimed to evaluate, through the lens of court and clinical staff, the introduction of a L&D service for defendants with NDs, designed to complement the existing L&D service. METHODS: A realist evaluation was undertaken involving multiple agencies based within an inner-city Magistrates' Court in London, England. We developed a logic model based on the initial programme theory focusing on component parts of the new enhanced service, specifically training, screening, signposting and interventions. We conducted semi-structured interviews with the court staff, judiciary and clinicians from the L&D service. RESULTS: The L&D service for defendants with NDs was successful in identifying and supporting the needs of those defendants. Benefits of this service included knowledge sharing, awareness raising and promoting good practice such as making reasonable adjustments. However, there were challenges for the court practitioners and clinicians in finding and accessing local specialist community services. CONCLUSION: A L&D service developed for defendants with NDs is feasible and beneficial to staff and clinicians who worked in the court setting leading to good practice being in place for the defendants. Going forward, a local care pathway would need to be agreed between commissioners and stakeholders including the judiciary to ensure timely and equitable access to local services by both defendants and practitioners working across diversion services for individuals with NDs.

Improving Cognitive Behaviour Therapy for Autistic Individuals: A Delphi Survey with Practitioners.

There is emerging evidence of the effectiveness of individual and group cognitive behaviour therapy (CBT) for autistic individuals, in particular to address anxiety, obsessive compulsive disorder and depression. Many CBT studies have incorporated relatively stringent standards, with regards to participant inclusion/exclusion criteria, delivery of manualised approaches and assurance of therapist training and oversight. We know less about what happens in routine CBT practice and, importantly, how service provision can be improved for autistic individuals. The present study recruited 50 CBT practitioners to a three round Delphi survey. The aims were to elicit professionals' perspectives regarding barriers to the acceptability and effectiveness of CBT for autistic individuals, and to generate consensus, both about ways of enhancing service provision, as well as the autism-relevant training needs of CBT practitioners. Study findings indicated six barriers to accessible and effective CBT for autistic individuals, relating to service provision, practitioner-related factors, client-related factors, CBT-related factors, national guidelines, and systemic considerations. There was participant consensus that changes in five domains (specifically relating to process issues, service provision, practitioners, techniques and therapeutic approach) could improve the CBT care pathway. Consensus was generated about the training needs of CBT practitioners: training about autism, CBT-specific issues, co-occurring conditions and engagement, were deemed fundamental for enhancing practice. Participants also identified autism-relevant issues for clinical supervision. Further sustained research is needed to determine the effects of adapted service provision and improved practitioner knowledge and skills on the outcomes of autistic individuals who have CBT.

Severe mental illness, common mental disorders, and neurodevelopmental conditions amongst 9088 lower court attendees in London, UK.

BACKGROUND: Court Mental Health Liaison and Diversion Services (CMHLDS) have developed in some countries as a response to the over-representation of mental illness and other vulnerabilities amongst defendants presenting to criminal justice (or correctional) systems. This study examined the characteristics and rates of mental disorder of 9088 defendants referred to CMHLDS. METHOD: The study analysed service level data, obtained from the National Health Service's mental health data set, to examine characteristics relating to gender, ethnicity and comorbidity of common mental and neurodevelopmental disorders at five CMHLDS across London between September 2015 and April 2017. RESULTS: The sample included 7186 males (79.1%) and 1719 females (18.9%), the gender of 183 (2%) were not recorded. Of those referred, 6616 (72.8%) presented with an identifiable mental disorder and 503 (5.5%) with a neurodevelopmental disorder (NDD). Significantly higher rates of schizophrenia were reported amongst Black defendants (n = 681; 37.2%) and Asian defendants (n = 315; 29%), while higher rates of depression were found amongst White defendants (n = 1007; 22.1%). Substance misuse was reported amongst 2813 defendants (31%), and alcohol misuse amongst 2111 (23.2%), with significantly high rates of substance and alcohol misuse amongst defendants presenting with schizophrenia or personality disorder. CONCLUSIONS: This is one of the largest studies to examine mental health needs and vulnerabilities amongst defendants presenting to CMHLDS. It will enable an improved understanding of the required service designs and resources required to manage the healthcare pathways for people attending CMHLDS.

Evaluation of a liaison and diversion Court Mental Health Service for defendants with neurodevelopmental disorders.

AIM: Neurodevelopmental disorders (NDD) may present as neuropsychiatric problems as well as impairments of motor, cognitive, social and communication functioning. This study describes the introduction of a specialist service with expertise in NDD into an existing court mental health liaison and diversion service to determine if the service would impact on the health needs or disposal outcomes of defendants. METHODS: We examined referrals of defendants with NDD disorders over 30-months at a London Magistrates' Court. The pre-existing Court Mental Health (CMH) service was enhanced to provide additional expertise and hereafter referred to as the CMH + NDD Service. Baseline data including gender, ethnicity, remands and the rates of mental disorders was collected from the CMH Service using the existing minimum mental health service dataset. This was compared with data collected from the CMH + NDD Service. RESULTS: We found the following rates of NDD 9.5 % (n = 43) for the CMH service, and 9.5 % (n = 79) for the CMH + NDD service. Although overall the rates were the same the number of defendants with a single NDD diagnosis was increased in the CMH + NDD service with ADHD 10 %, ASD and ID 4% higher, the rates of comorbid NDD decreased in the CMH + NDD service compared to baseline. Specific disorders such as depression were recorded at higher rates for NDD defendants in both phases, however, this did not reach significance. In contrast, schizophrenia and delusional disorders, alcohol and substance use were observed at much higher in the non-NDD defendants during both phases of the study. The rates of diagnosis of schizophrenia and delusional disorders increased for the NDD group within the CMH + NDD service. Following the first court appearance, there was a 10 % reduction in custodial remands for defendants with NDD who were seen by the CMH + NDD service (34.2 %, n = 25 in the CMH + NDD service vs 43.8 %, n = 14 in the CMH service). CONCLUSION: The study found it is possible to successfully integrate practitioners with expertise of NDD into existing liaison and diversion services. This service enhancement demonstrated modest evidence of service effectiveness, including an increase in the detection of comorbid mental illness and a reduction in custodial remands for defendants with NDD. Further work needs to be completed to examine how this model can be rolled out across multiple courts and in particular, a cost-benefit analysis is required to understand whether an approach involving a cluster of Courts, as opposed to a single site is the most effective approach for this group of defendants.

Learning disabilities: reducing inequalities.

This article introduces five small changes that nurses who do not usually work in the field of learning disabilities can make to improve healthcare and reduce avoidable, premature deaths of people with learning disabilities. The changes are small, cost little and enable nurses to creatively meet the needs of their patients.