[Predictors of Early Treatment Termination in Patients Detained under §64 StGB - A Literature Review]. / Prädiktoren der Erledigung bei nach §64 StGB untergebrachten Patienten ­ Ein Literaturreview.

BACKGROUND: The treatment of addicted offenders detained under § 64 of the German Criminal Code can be terminated prematurely. There is an extensive literature on predictors of such premature termination concerned with factors established before treatment. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this paper is to present predictors of premature termination that become apparent during the course of therapy. METHODS: We conducted a systematic literature search and included 16 publications. RESULTS: Patients and therapists rated impulsivity/aggressiveness, substance use relapses and a lack of patient-therapist relationship as negative predictors. Both groups assessed as beneficial the presence of motivation and a positive social network. CONCLUSION: To prevent early treatment termination a positive patient-therapist relationship, motivation and working through incidents during therapy is essential.

[The situation in the German forensic commitment-Results of a survey by the DGPPN]. / Die Situation des deutschen Maßregelvollzugs ­ Ergebnisse einer Umfrage der DGPPN.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: In German forensic psychiatry detention under Sections 63 and 64 of the German Penal Code have been repeatedly reformed over the past years; however, despite the most recent amendments to the law on detention, clinics and state authorities warn of insufficient capacities and worrying conditions. Media reports paint a defiant picture. At the same time, there is a lack of valid data that would allow an objective description of the situation in forensic psychiatry. Against this background the management of institutions in Germany has been surveyed. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The survey was conducted as an online survey and sent to all 78 forensic hospitals in Germany. The survey covered topics such as structural data of the facilities, the occupancy and staffing situation, incidents, support from supervisory authorities and funding agencies, and patient characteristics. The results are presented descriptively. RESULTS: Of the 78 facilities contacted, 45 (approximately 60%) participated at least partially in the survey. Many of the clinics (68.5%) complained of significant overcrowding. A clear lack of staff and rooms was reported, at the same time it was stated that patients do not receive adequate treatment. Approximately 1 in 5 patients have a length of stay for more than 10 years and one third of the clinics reported an increasing number of physical assaults by patients. CONCLUSION: This overview shows that the forensic psychiatric hospitals are in very different but generally strained situations. A significant number of clinics are under great pressure. Financial, structural, spatial and personnel resources were described as insufficient to properly and professionally fulfill the legal mandate. The treatment standards presented by the DGPPN in 2017 are not met in many clinics.

Implementation and evaluation of participatory advisory boards in mental health research: a research protocol of the 'PART-Beirat' project.

BACKGROUND: The use of participatory research approaches in the field of dementia and forensic mental health research has been on the rise. Advisory board structures, involving people with lived experience (PWLE), have frequently been used for guiding and leading research. Yet, there has been limited guidance on the establishment, retention and use of advisory boards in the field of dementia and forensic mental health research. OBJECTIVE: This project outlined in this research protocol will investigate the benefits and challenges of establishing three patient advisory boards, involving PWLE, practitioners and researchers with the purpose to guide research. Data will be used to develop guidelines for best practice in involving PWLE in dementia and forensic mental health research through advisory boards. METHODS: The research project will be divided into three phases: Phase I will involve two topic-specific systematic reviews on the use of participatory research with PWLE, followed by an initial study exploring PWLE's, practitioners' and researchers' expectations on research involvement. Phase II will consist of the establishment of three advisory boards, one focusing on dementia, one on forensic mental health and one overarching coordinating advisory board, which will involve PWLE from both fields. Phase III, will consist of interviews and focus groups with advisory board members, exploring any challenges and benefits of involving PWLE and practitioners in advisory boards for guiding research. To capture the impact of involving PWLE in different research phases and tasks, interviews and focus groups will be conducted at four different points of time (0, 6, 12, 18 months). Reflexive thematic analysis will be used for the analysis of data. DISCUSSION: The project aims to explore the involvement of PWLE and practitioners in guiding research and aims to develop guidelines for best practice in establishing and using patient advisory boards in dementia and forensic mental health research and involving PWLE and practitioners in research.

There is an increasing involvement of people with mental health issues in research, especially in the form of advisory boards. So far People With Lived Experience [PWLE] of mental health issues acquired either from first person experience or through family members, and mental health practitioners' involvement in research has been found to benefit research and society. This is because it increases reach and quality of research, whilst raising the voice of people commonly excluded from decision making (e.g. research, care provision). This research protocol describes the design of a three-year research project. The project aims to establish and use patient advisory boards, involving PWLE, practitioners and researchers, to guide research. The project will consist of three phases: (1) a review of previous studies on the use of participatory research with PWLE of dementia and forensic mental health care, followed by an initial study exploring PWLE's, practitioners' and researchers' expectations in research involvement, (2) the establishment of three advisory boards, one focusing on dementia, one on forensic mental health and one overarching coordinating advisory board, and (3) an exploration of challenges, barriers and benefits of involving PWLE of dementia/forensic mental health care and practitioners in advisory boards for research through interviews and focus groups. Interviews with PWLE and practitioners involved in the advisory boards will be conducted at four different points of time (0, 6, 12, 18 month). At the end, we aim to develop guidelines for establishing advisory board structures, involving PWLE and practitioners in research.

The TRAPD approach as a method for questionnaire translation.

Surveys and questionnaires are widely used in various areas of psychological and psychiatric research and practice. Many instruments have been used in several languages and across cultural contexts. A popular method of choice for their translation into another language involves translation and back-translation. Unfortunately, this method's ability to detect flaws in translation and necessities for cultural adaptation is limited. To address these shortcomings, the Translation, Review, Adjudication, Pretest, and Documentation (TRAPD) approach of questionnaire translation from cross-cultural survey design has been developed. In this approach, several translators with different professional backgrounds translate the questionnaire on their own first and then come together to discuss their versions. Since the translators' expertise is required to vary (e.g., survey methodology experts, translation experts, expert knowledge in the questionnaire's topic) the team approach results in a high-quality translation as well as offering opportunities for cultural adaptation. This article illustrates the application of the TRAPD approach on the basis of the translation process of the Forensic Restrictiveness Questionnaire from English into German. Differences and advantages are discussed.

Care for older forensic mental health patients: A consensus guidance document.

BACKGROUND: It is important to investigate the needs, experiences, and outcomes of older forensic mental health inpatients. In this consensus document, we offer practitioners working with older forensic inpatients recommendations to meet the unique older-age-related needs of this group. METHOD: We report on the findings of a scoping review of service provision and age-responsive interventions for this population. We complement this with a review of qualitative studies investigating staff and patient views on age-responsive inpatient care. RESULTS: The guidance synthesizes this evidence into sections on: epidemiological studies of demographic, clinical, and legal profiles; qualitative studies; investigations of patient need; evidence for interventions tailored to this patient group; future directions for research; and finally, recommendations for practice. Forensic patients over the age of 50 years have a different set of psychological and physical health needs from their peers. There is a dearth of dedicated interventions and support to assist patients through secure services and into the community. CONCLUSIONS: We suggest service providers involve older patients in treatment and service organization decisions, adapt interventions to be responsive to this group, train staff to recognize physical vulnerabilities and cognitive decline, and embrace methods of communication developed in other areas of care, such as dementia Care.

Quality of life, wellbeing, recovery, and progress for older forensic mental health patients: a qualitative investigation based on the perspectives of patients and staff.

PURPOSE: There is a lack of research informing service requirements for older (aged≥55 years) forensic mental health patients. The aim of this research was to increase knowledge about older forensic mental health patients' quality of life, wellbeing, recovery, and progress, in order to make recommendations of how to facilitate and enhance these factors. METHODS: In-depth interviews with patients (N = 37) and staff (N = 48) were undertaken; data were analysed using thematic analysis. RESULTS: Environmental (e.g., physical, structural and facilities), relational (staff, family and friends) and individual (characteristics, feelings, behaviours) factors were identified as enablers and/or obstacles to wellbeing, recovery, progress and quality of life. CONCLUSIONS: The physical and psychological environment of services needs to be adapted to meet the needs of patients. Therapeutic relationships with staff should be encouraged and a person-centred and individual recovery approach adopted. Prosocial relationships with peers, friends and family need to be fostered to enable positive recovery outcomes. Older patients should be empowered to develop a sense of autonomy to enable quality of life, wellbeing, and recovery, and progress.

Implementation of a peer support worker in a forensic psychiatric hospital in Germany-Views of patients.

Introduction: Peer Support has become common in psychiatric practice in the past decade. In this article we present findings from the implementation of peer support service into a forensic mental health hospital for offenders with substance use disorders from a patient's perspective. Methods: We conducted focus groups and interviews with patients of the clinic to explore their experiences, acceptance and perceived effect of the peer support service. Data collection was conducted in two different points in time, three months and twelve months after the introduction of the of some peer support intervention. In the first time point two focus groups involving 10 patients and three semi-structured individual interviews were conducted. The second time point included one focus group with five patients and five semi-structured individual interviews. All focus groups and individual interviews were audio recorded and transcribed verbatim. Data analysis was conducted using thematic analysis. Results: Five themes emerged, (1) attitudes toward the concept of peer support work and the peer support worker himself; (2) Activities and conversation topics; (3) experiences and effects; (4) Peer support in contrast to other professions; and (5) ideas and wishes for future peer support in the clinic. In general, patients agreed on the high value of peer support work. Discussion: Findings revealed a broad acceptance of the peer support intervention by most patients, but also some reservations. They saw the peer support worker as someone who is part of the professional team, and has a unique knowledge coming from personal experience. This knowledge often facilitated conversations about several topics related to patients experiences with substance use and their recovery journey.

Mandatory substance use treatment for justice-involved persons in Germany: a systematic review of reoffending, treatment and the recurrence of substance use outcomes.

Many jurisdictions implement mandatory substance use treatment for justice-involved persons. Germany is one such country; however, debates about the appropriateness and effectiveness of this disposal abound. Very little attention has been paid in the international literature to patients receiving mandatory treatment in Germany. This systematic review synthesises research on patients receiving substance use treatment in forensic hospitals under §64 of the German Penal Code with regard to three primary outcomes: treatment completion, reoffending, and the recurrence of substance use. Forty-five publications reporting on 36 studies were reviewed; publication dates ranged from 1988 to 2023. On average, 47% of patients did not successfully complete treatment, compared to 45% who did. Average follow-up reconviction rates were higher than in mentally ill and general offender populations as reported elsewhere. Approximately half of all patients reused substances during treatment. Suggestions for future research, including a focus on strength- and recovery-based indicators, and harmonising routine outcomes measurements, are given.

Pharmacological interventions for people with borderline personality disorder.

BACKGROUND: Among people with a diagnosis of borderline personality disorder (BPD) who are engaged in clinical care, prescription rates of psychotropic medications are high, despite the fact that medication use is off-label as a treatment for BPD. Nevertheless, people with BPD often receive several psychotropic drugs at a time for sustained periods. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of pharmacological treatment for people with BPD. SEARCH METHODS: For this update, we searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, 14 other databases and four trials registers up to February 2022. We contacted researchers working in the field to ask for additional data from published and unpublished trials, and handsearched relevant journals. We did not restrict the search by year of publication, language or type of publication. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials comparing pharmacological treatment to placebo, other pharmacologic treatments or a combination of pharmacologic treatments in people of all ages with a formal diagnosis of BPD. The primary outcomes were BPD symptom severity, self-harm, suicide-related outcomes, and psychosocial functioning. Secondary outcomes were individual BPD symptoms, depression, attrition and adverse events. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: At least two review authors independently selected trials, extracted data, assessed risk of bias using Cochrane's risk of bias tool and assessed the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach. We performed data analysis using Review Manager 5 and quantified the statistical reliability of the data using Trial Sequential Analysis. MAIN RESULTS: We included 46 randomised controlled trials (2769 participants) in this review, 45 of which were eligible for quantitative analysis and comprised 2752 participants with BPD in total. This is 18 more trials than the 2010 review on this topic. Participants were predominantly female except for one trial that included men only. The mean age ranged from 16.2 to 39.7 years across the included trials. Twenty-nine different types of medications compared to placebo or other medications were included in the analyses. Seventeen trials were funded or partially funded by the pharmaceutical industry, 10 were funded by universities or research foundations, eight received no funding, and 11 had unclear funding. For all reported effect sizes, negative effect estimates indicate beneficial effects by active medication. Compared with placebo, no difference in effects were observed on any of the primary outcomes at the end of treatment for any medication. Compared with placebo, medication may have little to no effect on BPD symptom severity, although the evidence is of very low certainty (antipsychotics: SMD -0.18, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.45 to 0.08; 8 trials, 951 participants; antidepressants: SMD -0.27, 95% CI -0.65 to 1.18; 2 trials, 87 participants; mood stabilisers: SMD -0.07, 95% CI -0.43 to 0.57; 4 trials, 265 participants). The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of medication compared with placebo on self-harm, indicating little to no effect (antipsychotics: RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.15 to 2.84; 2 trials, 76 participants; antidepressants: MD 0.45 points on the Overt Aggression Scale-Modified-Self-Injury item (0-5 points), 95% CI -10.55 to 11.45; 1 trial, 20 participants; mood stabilisers: RR 1.08, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.48; 1 trial, 276 participants). The evidence is also very uncertain about the effect of medication compared with placebo on suicide-related outcomes, with little to no effect (antipsychotics: SMD 0.05, 95 % CI -0.18 to 0.29; 7 trials, 854 participants; antidepressants: SMD -0.26, 95% CI -1.62 to 1.09; 2 trials, 45 participants; mood stabilisers: SMD -0.36, 95% CI -1.96 to 1.25; 2 trials, 44 participants). Very low-certainty evidence shows little to no difference between medication and placebo on psychosocial functioning (antipsychotics: SMD -0.16, 95% CI -0.33 to 0.00; 7 trials, 904 participants; antidepressants: SMD -0.25, 95% CI -0.57 to 0.06; 4 trials, 161 participants; mood stabilisers: SMD -0.01, 95% CI -0.28 to 0.26; 2 trials, 214 participants). Low-certainty evidence suggests that antipsychotics may slightly reduce interpersonal problems (SMD -0.21, 95% CI -0.34 to -0.08; 8 trials, 907 participants), and that mood stabilisers may result in a reduction in this outcome (SMD -0.58, 95% CI -1.14 to -0.02; 4 trials, 300 participants). Antidepressants may have little to no effect on interpersonal problems, but the corresponding evidence is very uncertain (SMD -0.07, 95% CI -0.69 to 0.55; 2 trials, 119 participants). The evidence is very uncertain about dropout rates compared with placebo by antipsychotics (RR 1.11, 95% CI 0.89 to 1.38; 13 trials, 1216 participants). Low-certainty evidence suggests there may be no difference in dropout rates between antidepressants (RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.76; 6 trials, 289 participants) and mood stabilisers (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.15; 9 trials, 530 participants), compared to placebo. Reporting on adverse events was poor and mostly non-standardised. The available evidence on non-serious adverse events was of very low certainty for antipsychotics (RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.29; 5 trials, 814 participants) and mood stabilisers (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.01; 1 trial, 276 participants). For antidepressants, no data on adverse events were identified. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: This review included 18 more trials than the 2010 version, so larger meta-analyses with more statistical power were feasible. We found mostly very low-certainty evidence that medication may result in no difference in any primary outcome. The rest of the secondary outcomes were inconclusive. Very limited data were available for serious adverse events. The review supports the continued understanding that no pharmacological therapy seems effective in specifically treating BPD pathology. More research is needed to understand the underlying pathophysiologic mechanisms of BPD better. Also, more trials including comorbidities such as trauma-related disorders, major depression, substance use disorders, or eating disorders are needed. Additionally, more focus should be put on male and adolescent samples.

Protocol for the CONNECT Study: A National Database and Prospective Follow-Up Study of Forensic Mental Health Patients in Germany.

In Germany, the most frequently used legal section to order forensic mental health treatment is § 63 of the Penal Code (Strafgesetzbuch; StGB). This disposition is primarily aimed at individuals with major mental illnesses who are not fully responsible for a criminal act they committed. Despite evaluation and follow-up studies being conducted within individual hospitals or federal states we lack key epidemiological data on this patient group across the whole country. The present study aims to fill this gap by conducting an annual survey of all eligible forensic mental health hospitals to develop a database of basic clinical, legal and demographic data. Staff at participating hospitals will complete an online survey answering questions about individual patients using routinely collected hospital records. Over the duration of the study, eight-and-a-half years, we aim to collect data on approximately N = 6,450 patients. Alongside important clinical data, we will use official reconviction data at 3- and 6-year follow-ups to investigate the number and types of crimes committed by discharged patients. We aim to extend the scientific literature on factors associated with reconviction in the Risk-Needs-Responsivity model by also measuring the extent to which treatment engagement and programme completion during care predicts reconviction. This study protocol describes the background and theoretical framework for this study, its methods of data collection and analysis, and steps taken to ensure compliance with ethical and data protection principles.

Staff perspectives on barriers to and facilitators of quality of life, health, wellbeing, recovery and reduced risk for older forensic mental-health patients: A qualitative interview study.

OBJECTIVES: There is a lack of research informing service delivery for older forensic mental health patients. This study explored service provision in forensic mental health inpatient and community services in England, investigating what is required for progress in terms of quality of life, health, wellbeing, recovery and reduced risk, and the barriers and facilitators associated with this. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were undertaken with 48 members of staff working with older forensic mental health patients in secure inpatient units or the community in England. Data were analysed using thematic analysis. RESULTS: Two global themes 'What works' and 'What doesn't work' were identified comprising themes representing environmental, interpersonal and individual factors. 'What works' included: positive social support and relationships; individualised holistic patient-centred care; hub and spoke approach to patient care; and suitable environments. 'What doesn't work' included: absence of/or maladaptive relationships with family and friends; gaps in service provision; and unsuitable environments. CONCLUSIONS: For older patients to progress to improved quality of life, health, wellbeing and reduced risk, multilevel and comprehensive support is required, comprising a range of services, interventions, and multidisciplinary input, and individualised to each patient's needs. The physical environment needs to be adapted for older patients and provide a social environment that seeks to include supportive families, friends and expert professional input. A clear patient progression pathway is required; this must be reflected in policy and provision.

Psychotherapies for borderline personality disorder: a focused systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: A recently updated Cochrane review supports the efficacy of psychotherapy for borderline personality disorder (BPD). AIMS: To evaluate the effects of standalone and add-on psychotherapeutic treatments more concisely. METHOD: We applied the same methods as the 2020 Cochrane review, but focused on adult samples and comparisons of active treatments and unspecific control conditions. Standalone treatments (i.e. necessarily including individual psychotherapy as either the sole or one of several treatment components) and add-on interventions (i.e. complementing any ongoing individual BPD treatment) were analysed separately. Primary outcomes were BPD severity, self-harm, suicide-related outcomes and psychosocial functioning. Secondary outcomes were remaining BPD diagnostic criteria, depression and attrition. RESULTS: Thirty-one randomised controlled trials totalling 1870 participants were identified. Among standalone treatments, statistically significant effects of low overall certainty were observed for dialectical behaviour therapy (self-harm: standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.54, P = 0.006; psychosocial functioning: SMD -0.51, P = 0.01) and mentalisation-based treatment (self-harm: risk ratio 0.51, P < 0.0007; suicide-related outcomes: risk ratio 0.10, P < 0.0001). For adjunctive interventions, moderate-quality evidence of beneficial effects was observed for DBT skills training (BPD severity: SMD -0.66, P = 0.002; psychosocial functioning: SMD -0.45, P = 0.002), and statistically significant low-certainty evidence was observed for the emotion regulation group (BPD severity: mean difference -8.49, P < 0.00001), manual-assisted cognitive therapy (self-harm: mean difference -3.03, P = 0.03; suicide-related outcomes: SMD -0.96, P = 0.005) and the systems training for emotional predictability and problem-solving (BPD severity: SMD -0.48, P = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: There is reasonable evidence to conclude that psychotherapeutic interventions are helpful for individuals with BPD. Replication studies are needed to enhance the certainty of findings.

Older forensic mental healthcare patients in England: demographics, physical health, mental wellbeing, cognitive ability and quality of life.

Background: Older individuals (e.g., 55 years and over) constitute a growing proportion of the forensic mental health patient population. As a group, they are vulnerable to health outcomes similar to other individuals with serious mental disorders of the same age; however, these concerns can be compounded by complex forensic-related care backgrounds and clinical presentations, lengthy periods of time spent in prison or psychiatric hospitals, substance use histories, and crime perpetration or victimisation. The healthcare needs and strengths of this group are not well understood.The aim of this study was to identify and describe the demographic, physical health, mental wellbeing, cognitive ability, and quality of life profiles of older forensic patients in community, low, medium, and high security settings in England. Methods: A cross-sectional quantitative study design was used. N=37 forensic patients aged 55 years and over completed six questionnaires. Data were also collected from patient records. Results: Most patients were male and were diagnosed with psychosis. The most frequently committed index offence types were violent offences. Patients were prescribed 7.6 medications on average and had average anticholinergic effect on cognition scores of 2.4. Nearly half the sample had diabetes, with an average BMI score of 31.7 (indicating obesity). Possible cognitive impairment was identified in 65% of the sample. Patients' assessments of their recovery-related quality of life and mental wellbeing were comparable to published UK general population values. Assessments of quality of life were positively correlated with the ability to undertake everyday activities and cognitive performance. Conclusions: We suggest that forensic services are well-placed to provide holistic mental and physical care to this group but that they should co-develop with patients a greater range of age-appropriate meaningful activities that are mindful of mobility issues and consider implementing more cognition-based and physical health interventions.

Forensic mental health services provide care for people who have committed a crime or are at risk of harm to themselves or others. This care takes many forms, including mental health support, physical health care, and assistance to re-enter the community after spending time in secure mental health hospitals. Due to changes in the general population, there is a growing number of patients over the age of 55 in care. Despite this, we do not know enough about the healthcare needs of this older patient group and how these needs differ from younger patients. This study aimed to find out more about this patient group. In the current study, thirty-seven forensic patients aged 55 years and older were recruited from low, medium and high security hospitals and community care. These patients completed six questionnaires. Patients were asked about their physical health, mental wellbeing, cognitive ability, and quality of life. Information about medical diagnoses and socio-demographic backgrounds were collected from hospital records. The study found that these patients had complex health needs. Most patients were diagnosed with psychosis (e.g., schizophrenia), were men, and had committed a violent criminal offence. On average patients were prescribed 7.6 medications, many of which carry significant side effects. Nearly half of the patients had diabetes, and most patients were obese or overweight. Quality of life scores were lower for patients who also reported having problems undertaking everyday activities and patients with cognitive impairment. Patients subjectively rated their mental wellbeing and quality of life similarly to the general population's ratings as reported in other studies. We suggest that services should work with patients to develop a greater number of age-appropriate activities and interventions aimed at improving cognitive and physical health.

Forensic mental health in Europe: some key figures.

PURPOSE: While the number of forensic beds and the duration of psychiatric forensic psychiatric treatment have increased in several European Union (EU) states, this is not observed in others. Patient demographics, average lengths of stay and legal frameworks also differ substantially. The lack of basic epidemiological information on forensic patients and of shared indicators on forensic care within Europe is an obstacle to comparative research. The reasons for such variation are not well understood. METHODS: Experts from seventeen EU states submitted data on forensic bed prevalence rates, gender distributions and average length of stay in forensic in-patient facilities. Average length of stay and bed prevalence rates were examined for associations with country-level variables including Gross Domestic Product (GDP), expenditure on healthcare, prison population, general psychiatric bed prevalence rates and democracy index scores. RESULTS: The data demonstrated substantial differences between states. Average length of stay was approximately ten times greater in the Netherlands than Slovenia. In England and Wales, 18% of patients were female compared to 5% in Slovenia. There was a 17-fold difference in forensic bed rates per 100,000 between the Netherlands and Spain. Exploratory analyses suggested average length of stay was associated with GDP, expenditure on healthcare and democracy index scores. CONCLUSION: The data presented in this study represent the most recent overview of key epidemiological data in forensic services across seventeen EU states. However, systematically collected epidemiological data of good quality remain elusive in forensic psychiatry. States need to develop common definitions and recording practices and contribute to a publicly available database of such epidemiological indicators.

A Comparison of English and Dutch Long-Stay Patients in Forensic Psychiatric Care.

Background: A significant proportion of forensic patients in England are long-stayers. This can be problematic as individuals are kept in restrictive environments at potentially inappropriate levels of security for many years, sometimes decades. Improvements to the current English forensic mental health system to meet the needs of long-stay forensic patients more effectively might be informed by the Dutch service for long-stay forensic patients. Aims: To compare the characteristics of representative samples of long-stay patients in England and in the Netherlands in an attempt to draw conclusions on the degree to which the Dutch service model might be relevant to England. Method: This cross-sectional study explores the relevance of the Dutch service model by comparing the characteristics of representative samples of long-stay patients in England (n = 401) and the Netherlands (n = 102). Descriptive statistics and analyses of differences between groups are presented. The Risk-Need-Responsivity model was used to guide the selection of the study variables and structure the interpretation of the findings. Results: Compared to their English counterparts, the long-stay Dutch patients were less likely to be diagnosed with schizophrenia, but more likely to have personality disorder and have committed sex offences. The English group were younger at first conviction and at first custodial sentence. The total number of offences and the proportion of violent offenders were similar, but the Dutch HCR-20 scores indicated a significantly higher risk of violence. Conclusions: Whilst there may be barriers to adopting the Dutch service model in England, the differences in the characteristics of the two groups studied here do not necessarily preclude this approach.