Co-production and adaptation of a prison-based problem-solving workbook to support the mental health of patients housed within a medium- and low-secure forensic service

INTRODUCTION

Problem-solving skills (PSS) help to provide a systematic approach to dealing with and managing complex problems. The overall aim of this study was to assess the acceptability and feasibility of developing and adapting a prison-based PSS  workbook for adults within a medium- and low-secure hospital.

METHOD

We used the Medical Research Council framework in our participatory mixed methods study incorporating an adapted survey (to identify what types of problems people experience in secure hospitals), a series of three interactive workshops (to co-produce two case study examples for a workbook) and we gathered feedback from patients and hospital staff on the acceptability and feasibility of the workbook. Data from the survey were used to inform the case study examples, and the feedback from patients and hospital staff was descriptively summarised and the results consolidated.

RESULTS

In total, 82 (51%) patients took part in the survey; 22 patients and 49 hospital staff provided feedback on the workbook. The survey results indicated that patients regularly experience problems while in the hospital. Patients reported problems relating to restrictions of freedom and boredom. The workshops produced two case studies for the workbooks, with mainly positive patient and staff feedback. More work is required to improve the visual representation of the characters in the case studies, the amount and content of the language and the mechanism of the intervention delivery.

CONCLUSION

The adaptation process proved acceptable and feasible to both patients and staff. The co-production methodology for the workbook and feedback from patients and staff was an effective way of iteratively refining the materials to ensure that they were both meaningful and acceptable to staff and patients. Subsequent work is required to develop the workbook and evaluate the feasibility of the intervention delivery, recruitment rates, uptake and adherence to the PSS using a randomised controlled trial.

PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

At each stage of the project consultation with patients and/or hospital staff was involved.

Mental health intervention research in Latin American correctional settings: A scoping review

BACKGROUND

The Latin American prison population has grown faster than anywhere else globally over the past two decades, reaching a total of 1.7 million people at any given time. However, research on mental health prevention and treatment interventions in Latin American prisons remains scarce.

AIMS

This study aimed to systematically review and synthesize research on prison mental health interventions conducted in the region.

METHODS

We used a two-stage scoping review design guided by the JBI Manual for Evidence Synthesis. Searches took place in December 2021 in nine databases using descriptors and synonyms. First, all prison mental health research in Latin America was retained. Secondly, using title and abstract screening, all research possibly related to interventions was retained for full text evaluation. Studies reporting interventions were assessed by country, language, institution, population, intervention type, intervention focus and outcomes.

RESULTS

N = 34 studies were included in this review. These were 13 case reports, seven expert consensus papers and 14 quantitative studies (four randomized controlled trials, nine cohort studies, one quasi-experimental study). Fourteen interventions were targeted at promoting prosocial behavior, seven studies each aimed to improve mental health and to treat substance use disorders. Six studies involved the treatment of sexual offending behavior, and 3 focused on reducing criminal recidivism. Psychoeducation (n = 12) and motivational interviewing (n = 5) were the most frequent intervention types studied. Promising data from trials showed that anger management, depression, substance use and reoffending could be successfully addressed through interventions.

CONCLUSIONS

Implementation and effectiveness research of mental health interventions in Latin American prisons is scarce. Addressing mental health, substance use and prosocial behavior outcomes should be considered in future research. There is a particular dearth of controlled trials describing quantifiable outcomes.

Erratum: Six Nations: a clinical scenario comparison of systems for prisoners with psychosis in Australia, Bolivia and four European nations - ERRATUM

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1192/bji.2022.16.].

The mental wellbeing of female prisoners in Chile

OBJECTIVE

To measure and understand mental wellbeing among women prisoners in Chile, as part of a larger study.

RESULT

Sixty-eight sentenced prisoners in a women's prison participated in a survey, giving a response rate of 56.7%. Using the Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Wellbeing Scale (WEMWBS), the mean wellbeing score of participants was 53.77 out of maximum score of 70. Whilst 90% of the 68 women felt useful at least some of the time, 25% rarely felt relaxed, close to others or able to make up their own minds about things. Data generated from two focus groups attended by six women offered explanations for survey findings. Thematic analysis identified stress and loss of autonomy due to the prison regime as factors which negatively affect mental wellbeing. Interestingly, whilst offering prisoners an opportunity to feel useful, work was identified as a source of stress. Interpersonal factors linked to a lack of safe friendships within the prison and little contact with family had an adverse impact on mental wellbeing. The routine measurement of mental wellbeing among prisoners using the WEMWBS is recommended in Chile and other Latin American countries to identify the impact of policies, regimes, healthcare systems and programmes on mental health and wellbeing.

Six nations: a clinical scenario comparison of systems for prisoners with psychosis in Australia, Bolivia and four European nations

This paper compares across six nations the mental health systems available to prisoners with the highest acuity of psychosis and risk combined with the lowest level of insight into the need for treatment. Variations were observed within and between nations. Findings highlight the likely impact of factors such as mental health legislation and the prison mental health workforce on a nation's ability to deliver timely and effective treatment close to home for prisoners who lack capacity to consent to treatment for their severe mental illness. The potential benefits of addressing the resulting inequalities are noted.

Involving service users to identify research priorities in a UK forensic mental health service

AIMS AND METHOD

Patient and public involvement (PPI) is a priority for health research. PPI improves the relevance and quality of research. The study aimed to involve service users in identifying research priorities for the service. A two-phase adapted Delphi technique was used to generate a list of research topics from service users in secure in-patient mental health settings and on specialist mental health prison wings. Topic content analysis was undertaken. Service users were further consulted, and research themes were ranked in order of priority.

RESULTS

Of the eight research themes identified, the three given the highest priority by service users were, in descending order, physical health, future plans and moving on, and causes of illness and crime.

CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS

Service users are willing to be involved in setting research priorities for mental health services. Through non-tokenistic PPI, service users can uniquely shape the research agenda of mental health services.

A feasibility evaluation of Discovery Group: determining the acceptability and potential outcomes of a patient-led research group in a secure mental health inpatient setting

BACKGROUND

Patient and public involvement and engagement (PPIE) is recognised as an essential part of health research. In addition to providing an opportunity for patients to shape health research and acquire research skills, in the inpatient mental health setting, PPIE may have additional value in providing meaningful activity and enhancing recovery, as defined using connectedness, hope, identity, meaning and empowerment (CHIME) principles. However, there have been challenges in applying PPIE principles in secure mental health inpatient settings. An eight -session PPIE programme ("Discovery Group") was designed to support patient-led research in a secure mental health hospital. This feasibility study aims to evaluate the acceptability of the programme from the perspective of patients and identify potential outcomes.

METHODS

A retrospective single-arm post-programme evaluation of Discovery Group was undertaken. Participants attended an evaluation workshop where they were interviewed individually to complete an acceptability questionnaire designed using the domains of the Theoretical Framework of Acceptability. Participants also completed an outcomes questionnaire, which included CHIME-based recovery items, and were invited to share their ideas for programme improvement on posters. Quantitative data were analysed descriptively. Direct content analysis was applied to qualitative data.

RESULTS

In our sample, eight participants attended at least one session of the discovery group with one patient attending all sessions. Most of the participants felt positive about taking part in the group and expressed interest in joining another group in future. All participants experienced some burden from the effort required during group sessions, but a low level of opportunity cost in terms of the extent to which they perceived they had to forfeit benefits to participate in the programme.. Some described the group as effective in helping them learn about research. Of the five CHIME recovery domains, only connectedness was reported as a benefit of the group. The participants valued the opportunity to use their time well and demonstrate that they were undertaking purposeful activity as part of their rehabilitation and recovery.

CONCLUSIONS

Discovery Group is a tool to overcome barriers to effective PPIE in research in a secure inpatient mental health setting. The programme has a high level of acceptability among participants and offered several potential outcomes which require testing through further study.

Sleep interventions for adults admitted to psychiatric inpatient settings: a scoping review protocol

OBJECTIVE

The scoping review aims to identify how sleep is measured and what sleep interventions are used effectively in psychiatric inpatient settings. Potential barriers to measuring sleep in inpatient settings will be classified.

INTRODUCTION

Polysomnography has shown that poor sleep is associated with emotional, cognitive, and somatic changes, as well as increased risks in suicide ideation and aggression. People with mental illness often experience sleep disturbances and believe the psychiatric inpatient environment contributes to sleep problems. The use of sleep interventions has been studied widely in general inpatient wards; less is known of similar interventions in psychiatric inpatient settings.

INCLUSION CRITERIA

The review will include studies that focus on the effectiveness of sleep interventions for adults in any psychiatric inpatient setting. Studies that focus solely on sleep apnea, parasomnias, or restless legs syndrome will be excluded.

METHODS

A literature search of PsycINFO, Web of Science, MEDLINE, and Google Scholar will be conducted. Studies identified will be screened and examined against the eligibility criteria. Only studies published in English will be considered, and there will be no date limitation applied to the search. Eligible studies will be assessed for risk of bias and relevant data will be extracted to answer the review questions. Extracted data will be presented in narrative and tabular formats.

Mental health in the republic of Paraguay

Paraguay is a landlocked country in South America. It is a democratic low-middle-income nation, and the Ministry of Public Health and Social Welfare is responsible for its healthcare system. Mental health services receive just 1–2% of healthcare budgets, and there are only 1.6 psychiatrists per 100 000 inhabitants. There are insufficient resources to adequately assess and treat mental disorders in high-risk populations such as children, adolescents and prisoners. Despite several improvements to mental health policies within the past two decades, the nation still lacks a Mental Health Act and specific policies required to optimise the mental health of the population.

Interventions for female drug-using offenders

BACKGROUND

This review represents one in a family of three reviews focusing on the effectiveness of interventions in reducing drug use and criminal activity for offenders.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of interventions for female drug-using offenders in reducing criminal activity, or drug use, or both.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched 12 electronic bibliographic databases up to February 2019.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 13 trials with 2560 participants. Interventions were delivered in prison (7/13 studies, 53%) and community (6/13 studies, 47%) settings. The rating of bias was affected by the lack of clear reporting by authors, and we rated many items as 'unclear'. In two studies (190 participants) collaborative case management in comparison to treatment as usual did not reduce drug use (risk ratio (RR) 0.65, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.20 to 2.12; 1 study, 77 participants; low-certainty evidence), reincarceration at nine months (RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.32 to 1.57; 1 study, 77 participants; low-certainty evidence), and number of subsequent arrests at 12 months (RR 1.11, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.49; 1 study, 113 participants; low-certainty evidence). One study (36 participants) comparing buprenorphine to placebo showed no significant reduction in self-reported drug use at end of treatment (RR 0.57, 95% CI 0.27 to 1.20) and three months (RR 0.58, 95% CI 0.25 to 1.35); very low-certainty evidence. No adverse events were reported. One study (38 participants) comparing interpersonal psychotherapy to a psychoeducational intervention did not find reduction in drug use at three months (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.30 to 1.50; low-certainty evidence). One study (31 participants) comparing acceptance and commitment therapy (ACT) to a waiting list showed no significant reduction in self-reported drug use using the Addiction Severity Index (mean difference (MD) -0.04, 95% CI -0.37 to 0.29) and abstinence from drug use at six months (RR 2.89, 95% CI 0.73 to 11.43); low-certainty evidence. One study (314 participants) comparing cognitive behavioural skills to a therapeutic community programme and aftercare showed no significant reduction in self-reported drug use (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.58 to 1.27), re-arrest for any type of crime (RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.03); criminal activity (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.63 to 1.03), or drug-related crime (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.32). A significant reduction for arrested (not for parole) violations at six months follow-up was significantly in favour of cognitive behavioural skills (RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.25 to 0.77; very low-certainty evidence). A second study with 115 participants comparing cognitive behavioural skills to an alternative substance abuse treatment showed no significant reduction in reincarceration at 12 months (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.43 to 1.12; low certainty-evidence. One study (44 participants) comparing cognitive behavioural skills and standard therapy versus treatment as usual showed no significant reduction in Addiction Severity Index (ASI) drug score at three months (MD 0.02, 95% CI -0.05 to 0.09) and six months (MD -0.02, 95% CI -0.09 to 0.05), and incarceration at three months (RR 0.46, 95% CI 0.04 to 4.68) and six months (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.20 to 1.27); very low-certainty evidence. One study (171 participants) comparing a single computerised intervention versus case management showed no significant reduction in the number of days not using drugs at three months (MD -0.89, 95% CI -4.83 to 3.05; low certainty-evidence). One study (116 participants) comparing dialectic behavioural therapy and case management (DBT-CM) versus a health promotion intervention showed no significant reduction at six months follow-up in positive drug testing (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.43 to 1.03), number of people not using marijuana (RR 1.23, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.59), crack (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.14), cocaine (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.12), heroin (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.13), methamphetamine (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.20), and self-reported drug use for any drug (RR 1.20, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.56); very low-certainty evidence. One study (211 participants) comparing a therapeutic community programme versus work release showed no significant reduction in marijuana use at six months (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.19 to 5.65), nor 18 months (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.07 to 14.45), heroin use at six months (RR 1.59, 95% CI 0.49 to 5.14), nor 18 months (RR 1.92, 95% CI 0.24 to 15.37), crack use at six months (RR 2.07, 95% CI 0.41 to 10.41), nor 18 months (RR 1.64, 95% CI 0.19 to 14.06), cocaine use at six months (RR 1.09, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.50), nor 18 months (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.35). It also showed no significant reduction in incarceration for drug offences at 18 months (RR 1.45, 95% CI 0.87 to 2.42); with overall very low- to low-certainty evidence. One study (511 participants) comparing intensive discharge planning and case management versus prison only showed no significant reduction in use of marijuana (RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.16), hard drugs (RR 1.12, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.43), crack cocaine (RR 1.08, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.54), nor positive hair testing for marijuana (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.55 to 1.03); it found a significant reduction in arrests (RR 0.19, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.87), but no significant reduction in drug charges (RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.53) nor incarceration (RR 1.09, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.39); moderate-certainty evidence. One narrative study summary (211 participants) comparing buprenorphine pre- and post-release from prison showed no significant reduction in drug use at 12 months post-release; low certainty-evidence. No adverse effects were reported.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The studies showed a high degree of heterogeneity for types of comparisons, outcome measures and small samples. Descriptions of treatment modalities are required. On one outcome of arrest (no parole violations), we identified a significant reduction when cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) was compared to a therapeutic community programme. But for all other outcomes, none of the interventions were effective. Larger trials are required to increase the precision of confidence about the certainty of evidence.

Interventions for drug-using offenders with co-occurring mental health problems

BACKGROUND

This review represents one from a family of three reviews focusing on interventions for drug-using offenders. Many people under the care of the criminal justice system have co-occurring mental health problems and drug misuse problems; it is important to identify the most effective treatments for this vulnerable population.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of interventions for drug-using offenders with co-occurring mental health problems in reducing criminal activity or drug use, or both.This review addresses the following questions.• Does any treatment for drug-using offenders with co-occurring mental health problems reduce drug use?• Does any treatment for drug-using offenders with co-occurring mental health problems reduce criminal activity?• Does the treatment setting (court, community, prison/secure establishment) affect intervention outcome(s)?• Does the type of treatment affect treatment outcome(s)?

SEARCH METHODS

We searched 12 databases up to February 2019 and checked the reference lists of included studies. We contacted experts in the field for further information.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials designed to prevent relapse of drug use and/or criminal activity among drug-using offenders with co-occurring mental health problems.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures as expected by Cochrane .

MAIN RESULTS

We included 13 studies with a total of 2606 participants. Interventions were delivered in prison (eight studies; 61%), in court (two studies; 15%), in the community (two studies; 15%), or at a medium secure hospital (one study; 8%). Main sources of bias were unclear risk of selection bias and high risk of detection bias.Four studies compared a therapeutic community intervention versus (1) treatment as usual (two studies; 266 participants), providing moderate-certainty evidence that participants who received the intervention were less likely to be involved in subsequent criminal activity (risk ratio (RR) 0.67, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.53 to 0.84) or returned to prison (RR 0.40, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.67); (2) a cognitive-behavioural therapy (one study; 314 participants), reporting no significant reduction in self-reported drug use (RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.46 to 1.32), re-arrest for any type of crime (RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.44 to 1.09), criminal activity (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.05), or drug-related crime (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.56 to 1.36), yielding low-certainty evidence; and (3) a waiting list control (one study; 478 participants), showing a significant reduction in return to prison for those people engaging in the therapeutic community (RR 0.60, 95% CI 0.46 to 0.79), providing moderate-certainty evidence.One study (235 participants) compared a mental health treatment court with an assertive case management model versus treatment as usual, showing no significant reduction at 12 months' follow-up on an Addictive Severity Index (ASI) self-report of drug use (mean difference (MD) 0.00, 95% CI -0.03 to 0.03), conviction for a new crime (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.22), or re-incarceration to jail (RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.01), providing low-certainty evidence.Four studies compared motivational interviewing/mindfulness and cognitive skills with relaxation therapy (one study), a waiting list control (one study), or treatment as usual (two studies). In comparison to relaxation training, one study reported narrative information on marijuana use at three-month follow-up assessment. Researchers reported a main effect < .007 with participants in the motivational interviewing group, showing fewer problems than participants in the relaxation training group, with moderate-certainty evidence. In comparison to a waiting list control, one study reported no significant reduction in self-reported drug use based on the ASI (MD -0.04, 95% CI -0.37 to 0.29) and on abstinence from drug use (RR 2.89, 95% CI 0.73 to 11.43), presenting low-certainty evidence at six months (31 participants). In comparison to treatment as usual, two studies (with 40 participants) found no significant reduction in frequency of marijuana use at three months post release (MD -1.05, 95% CI -2.39 to 0.29) nor time to first arrest (MD 0.87, 95% CI -0.12 to 1.86), along with a small reduction in frequency of re-arrest (MD -0.66, 95% CI -1.31 to -0.01) up to 36 months, yielding low-certainty evidence; the other study with 80 participants found no significant reduction in positive drug screens at 12 months (MD -0.7, 95% CI -3.5 to 2.1), providing very low-certainty evidence.Two studies reported on the use of multi-systemic therapy involving juveniles and families versus treatment as usual and adolescent substance abuse therapy. In comparing treatment as usual, researchers found no significant reduction up to seven months in drug dependence on the Drug Use Disorders Identification Test (DUDIT) score (MD -0.22, 95% CI -2.51 to 2.07) nor in arrests (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.36), providing low-certainty evidence (156 participants). In comparison to an adolescent substance abuse therapy, one study (112 participants) found significant reduction in re-arrests up to 24 months (MD 0.24, 95% CI 0.76 to 0.28), based on low-certainty evidence.One study (38 participants) reported on the use of interpersonal psychotherapy in comparison to a psychoeducational intervention. Investigators found no significant reduction in self-reported drug use at three months (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.30 to 1.50), providing very low-certainty evidence. The final study (29 participants) compared legal defence service and wrap-around social work services versus legal defence service only and found no significant reductions in the number of new offences committed at 12 months (RR 0.64, 95% CI 0.07 to 6.01), yielding very low-certainty evidence.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Therapeutic community interventions and mental health treatment courts may help people to reduce subsequent drug use and/or criminal activity. For other interventions such as interpersonal psychotherapy, multi-systemic therapy, legal defence wrap-around services, and motivational interviewing, the evidence is more uncertain. Studies showed a high degree of variation, warranting a degree of caution in interpreting the magnitude of effect and the direction of benefit for treatment outcomes.

Mental health law in Bolivia

Bolivia's mental health plan is not currently embedded in mental health legislation or a legal framework, though in 2014 legislative change was proposed that would begin to provide protection and support for the hospital admission, treatment and care of people with mental disorders in Bolivia. Properly resourced, regulated and rights-based mental health practice is still required. Mental healthcare in the primary care setting should be prioritised, and safeguards are needed for the autonomy of all patients, including all those in vulnerable and cared-for groups, including those in prisons.

Mental health e-supervision for primary care doctors in Sudan using the WHO mhGAP Intervention Guide

This paper describes the evaluation of a pilot e-supervision programme, with a focus on feasibility. The findings suggest that e-supervision in mental health using the World Health Organization (WHO) Mental Health Gap Action Programme (mhGAP) Intervention Guide and case-based discussions is valued by participants and can improve the knowledge, confidence and beliefs of primary care doctors in low- and middle-income countries.