Characterisation & Clinical Outcome in Forensic Psychiatric Services

  • Research type

    Research Study

  • Full title

    Beyond Diagnostic Categories: A Comprehensive Characterisation of Mentally Disordered Women and Men with Challenging Behaviours and Prediction of Treatment Outcomes in Forensic Services

  • IRAS ID

    260683

  • Contact name

    Veena Kumari

  • Contact email

    veena.kumari@brunel.ac.uk

  • Sponsor organisation

    Brunel University London

  • Duration of Study in the UK

    2 years, 5 months, 16 days

  • Research summary

    Forensic psychiatric patients present with comorbid mental health and personality difficulties, and are often also disruptive and/or antisocial. The majority of forensic psychiatric patients have a diagnosis of schizophrenia and/or personality disorder, with the most common personality disorders being antisocial personality disorder (ASPD) and borderline personality disorder (BPD). Comorbidities often include co-existing mental health (e.g. schizophrenia) and personality (ASPD) difficulties, but neurodevelopmental comorbidity (e.g. ADHD) is also common.

    Forensic psychiatric patients are characterised as having difficulties in memory, decision-making, reading, processing of emotions, impulsivity, recklessness, and disengagement with social rewards.

    A clearer understanding of the characteristics, and psychological profiles, of different diagnostic subgroups of forensic psychiatric patients can aid and advance clinical care in two fundamental ways: i) formulation of effective treatment and management plans based on patients’ clinical and cognitive profiles, and ii) the prediction of outcome and thus appropriate allocation of resources. To this end, this project aims to examine and compare the clinical (cross-diagnostic dimensions), cognitive, affective, and reward processing, profiles of patients currently receiving care within medium and low secure forensic psychiatric services. The project aims to categorise and characterise participants based on those profiles and then relate those profiles to future clinical outcomes and behaviour. Patient and healthy controls data will also be compared.

  • REC name

    London - Camberwell St Giles Research Ethics Committee

  • REC reference

    19/LO/0605

  • Date of REC Opinion

    22 Jul 2019

  • REC opinion

    Further Information Favourable Opinion