Innovations in violence risk assessment: What aviation can teach us about assessing and managing risk for rare and serious outcomes

Intervening factors between risk of violence and aggressive behaviours among forensic inpatients: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

Risk of violence is closely associated with aggression propensity. However, there is a lack of research to explain the mechanisms behind this association, especially among the patients of forensic secure facilities. This review aimed to identify and synthesize the available literature concerning the intervening factors (mediating or moderating factors) in the relationship between the risk of violence and aggressive behavior in forensic secure facilities.

METHODS

Two electronic academic databases were searched: Scopus and Web of Science (WoS) using specific keywords as search terms derived from the PCC framework with no specific time limit. The search strategy was developed based on the JBI Manual for Evidence Synthesis and utilised the PRISMA-ScR guidelines. Data on the risk of violence, intervening factors, and aggressive behavior were extracted from the included studies. Further analysis was performed whereby similar data were grouped and synthesised together.

RESULTS

The initial search produced 342 studies. However, only nine studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria. The nine studies included 1,068 adult forensic inpatients from various psychiatric hospitals. Only mediation studies reported significant mechanisms of influence between the risk of violence and aggressive behavior. It is postulated that the human agency factor may be the underlying factor that influences a person's functioning and the subsequent series of events between the risk of violence and aggression.

CONCLUSIONS

In light of the paucity of evidence in this area, a generalised conclusion cannot be established. More studies are warranted to address the gaps before conclusive recommendations can be proposed to the relevant stakeholders.

Risk, resilience, and recovery in forensic mental health: An integrated conceptual model

In this paper we describe a novel, integrated conceptual model that brings together core elements across structured tools assessing risk for future violence, protective factors, and progress in treatment and recovery in forensic mental health settings. We argue that the value of such a model lies in its ability to improve clinical efficiencies and streamline assessment protocols, facilitate meaningful participation of patients in assessment and treatment planning activities and increase the accessibility of clinical assessments to principal users of this information. The four domains appearing in the model (treatment engagement, stability of illness and behavior, insight, and professional and personal support) are described, and common clinical manifestations of each domain within a forensic context are illustrated. We conclude with a discussion of the types of research that would be needed to validate a concept model such as the one presented here as well as implications for clinical practice and implementation.

The empirical evidence base for the use of the HCR-20: A narrative review of study designs and transferability of results to clinical practice

The HCR-20, a widely used method of assessing and managing risk, relies on the structured professional judgement approach. This paper reports a narrative literature review of the HCR-20 studies to explore the applicability of the study results to the use of the HCR-20 in clinical practice. From a literature search using terms "HCR-20" and "HCR 20", 206 papers were included. Of studies using the HCR-20 version 2 (n = 191), 92% (n = 176) relied on variables based on scores derived by adding item scores, and 50% (n = 95) tested the HCR-20 using predictive validity methodology. Of the HCR-20 version 3 studies (n = 21), the "presence of risk factors" step was the most commonly examined (n = 18, 86%), but 2 of the 7 steps ("scenario planning" and "management") were not examined at all. Amongst those studies whose primary focus was on the HCR-20, 67% (n = 64/95) did so by assessing the predictive validity of the tool. Only one employed a design to test whether the use of the HCR-20 affected violence rates. The predominant study design provides support for the use of the HCR-20 as an actuarial tool, and there is limited empirical evidence in support of its effectiveness as a structured professional judgement approach to the assessment and management of the risk of violence.