TY - JOUR
T1 - Assessing Protective Factors for Violence Risk in U.K. General Mental Health Services Using the Structured Assessment of Protective Factors
AU - Haines, Alina
AU - Brown, Andrew
AU - Javaid, Syed Fahad
AU - Khan, Fayyaz
AU - Noblett, Steve
AU - Omodunbi, Oladipupo
AU - Sadiq, Khurram
AU - Zaman, Wahid
AU - Whittington, Richard
N1 - Funding Information:
Ethical approval was received from the Health Research Authority, the National Research Ethics Service (Liverpool East Health Research Ethics Committee), and governance approvals from all the participating National Health Service (NHS) trusts were in place before recruitment and data collection.
Publisher Copyright:
© The Author(s) 2017.
PY - 2018/9/1
Y1 - 2018/9/1
N2 - Violence risk assessment and management are key tasks in mental health services and should be guided by validated instruments covering both risk and protective factors. This article is part of an international effort to validate the Structured Assessment of Protective Factors (SAPROF) for violence. The SAPROF, Historical, Clinical, Risk Management–20 (HCR-20) and the Psychopathy Checklist–Screening Version (PCL-SV) were administered in a sample of 261 patients in U.K. forensic, general inpatient, and community mental health settings. There was significant variation between these groups on SAPROF scores with fewer protective factors in the forensic group. The prospective validity of the SAPROF for nonviolence in the general inpatient and community samples was moderate (area under the curve [AUC] =.60). Adoption of the SAPROF or similar instruments as a supplement to risk-focused assessments has the potential to improve awareness of protective factors and enhance therapeutic engagement in a range of mental health services.
AB - Violence risk assessment and management are key tasks in mental health services and should be guided by validated instruments covering both risk and protective factors. This article is part of an international effort to validate the Structured Assessment of Protective Factors (SAPROF) for violence. The SAPROF, Historical, Clinical, Risk Management–20 (HCR-20) and the Psychopathy Checklist–Screening Version (PCL-SV) were administered in a sample of 261 patients in U.K. forensic, general inpatient, and community mental health settings. There was significant variation between these groups on SAPROF scores with fewer protective factors in the forensic group. The prospective validity of the SAPROF for nonviolence in the general inpatient and community samples was moderate (area under the curve [AUC] =.60). Adoption of the SAPROF or similar instruments as a supplement to risk-focused assessments has the potential to improve awareness of protective factors and enhance therapeutic engagement in a range of mental health services.
KW - mental health services
KW - protective factors
KW - risk assessment
KW - risk violence
KW - structured professional judgment
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85041910646&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85041910646&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1177/0306624X17749449
DO - 10.1177/0306624X17749449
M3 - Article
C2 - 29284378
AN - SCOPUS:85041910646
SN - 0306-624X
VL - 62
SP - 3965
EP - 3983
JO - International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology
JF - International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology
IS - 12
ER -