1,684
Views
29
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
REVIEWS AND COMMENTARY

A Review and Analysis of Routine Outcome Measures for Forensic Mental Health Services

&
 

Abstract

Considerable progress has been made in recent years towards implementing routine outcome measures within mental health services. However, the applicability of these tools for forensic-mental health populations has been questioned. A review and analysis was conducted to identify tools that could validly be applied in a forensic context, to provide a measure of functioning, recovery, risk, and placement pathways. Nineteen instruments were initially identified and evaluated against a hierarchy of criteria. While no tool assessed all domains of interest, six tools were ultimately considered to have potential utility as outcome measures for users of forensic mental health services.

Notes

1 The terms consumer, client and patient have been used interchangeably within this review to refer to a person who has engaged with a mental health service for assessment or treatment.

2 The reader is referred to reports by the National Mental Health Working Group (2003; http://amhocn.org/static/files/assets/5ddbb17d/NOCC_Specs_V1.5.pdf) and Beveridge, Papps, Bower, & Smith (2012; http://www.tepou.co.nz/download/asset/502) for a review of all mandated measures currently used in Australia and New Zealand.

3 Search terms used: [“outcome measure*” or “routine outcome measure*” or (“outcome” & “measure*”) or (“need*” & “assess*”) or “risk assessment” or “instruments” or “measurement” or “achievement measure*” or “aptitude measure*” or “attitude measure*” or “criterion referenced tests” or “group testing” or “individual testing” or “instrument*” or “inventor*” or “occupational measure*” or “perform* tests” or “personality measure*” or “post test*” or “pre test*” or “profile*” or “psych* evaluation” or “psych* assessment” or “psychometrics” or “questionnaires” or “rating” or “screening” or “sociometric” or “standardized tests” or “statistical measure*” or “surveys” or “symptom checklists” or “test*” or “recovery” or “recovery measure*”] and [“forens*” or “justice” or “criminal” or “offend*”] (Limiters: Publication year: January 1980 – May 2011).

4 The authors are aware that the HCR-20 has recently been updated to version 3 (HCR-20V3; Douglas, Hart, Webster, & Belfrage, 2013), however this was not available for consideration during the present review period.

5 5*Denotes key references for ROM tools reviewed in this article.Denotes references of validation studies for the ROM tools reviewed.

Reprints and Corporate Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

To request a reprint or corporate permissions for this article, please click on the relevant link below:

Academic Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

Obtain permissions instantly via Rightslink by clicking on the button below:

If you are unable to obtain permissions via Rightslink, please complete and submit this Permissions form. For more information, please visit our Permissions help page.