{"title":"Systematic review of risk factors for violence in psychosis: 10-year update","authors":"Tyra Lagerberg, Sinéad Lambe, Anabelle Paulino, Rongqin Yu, Seena Fazel","doi":"10.1192/bjp.2024.120","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<span>Background</span><p>Understanding risk factors for violence in people with psychosis can inform risk management and violence prevention. However, much of the evidence comes from cross-sectional studies, and previous reviews require updating.</p><span>Aims</span><p>To synthesise evidence from longitudinal studies on risk factors for violence in people with schizophrenia-spectrum disorders, bipolar disorder or other affective psychoses.</p><span>Method</span><p>We searched five bibliographic databases up to June 2022. We identified longitudinal studies reporting risk factors for violence in individuals diagnosed with schizophrenia or other psychoses using DSM or ICD criteria. If ≥3 independent samples reported a risk factor, we conducted random-effects meta-analyses to provide a pooled estimate. We also meta-analysed risk factors by major domains.</p><span>Results</span><p>We identified 47 longitudinal studies on risk factors for violence in psychosis, representing 41 independent samples – 21 from the original and 20 from the updated review – and 203 297 individuals. A total of 30 risk factors were present in ≥3 independent samples. Criminal history factors were associated with the greatest risk of violent outcomes (pooled odds ratio 3.50, 95% CI = 2.37, 5.16), followed by substance misuse factors (odds ratio 2.36, 95% CI = 1.99, 2.80). Many treatment-related factors were protective (odds ratio 0.54, 95% CI = 0.34, 0.85). Effect estimates were attenuated in inpatient settings. We also identified novel risk factors, including cannabis use, in a secondary analysis (odds ratio 3.34, 95% CI = 2.32, 4.82).</p><span>Conclusions</span><p>Using longitudinal evidence, we have validated comorbid substance misuse and criminal history as major risk factors for violence in psychosis. Novel factors such as cannabis use need further replication. Several identified factors are possible intervention targets if associations are found to be causal.</p>","PeriodicalId":22495,"journal":{"name":"The British Journal of Psychiatry","volume":"46 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The British Journal of Psychiatry","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1192/bjp.2024.120","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background
Understanding risk factors for violence in people with psychosis can inform risk management and violence prevention. However, much of the evidence comes from cross-sectional studies, and previous reviews require updating.
Aims
To synthesise evidence from longitudinal studies on risk factors for violence in people with schizophrenia-spectrum disorders, bipolar disorder or other affective psychoses.
Method
We searched five bibliographic databases up to June 2022. We identified longitudinal studies reporting risk factors for violence in individuals diagnosed with schizophrenia or other psychoses using DSM or ICD criteria. If ≥3 independent samples reported a risk factor, we conducted random-effects meta-analyses to provide a pooled estimate. We also meta-analysed risk factors by major domains.
Results
We identified 47 longitudinal studies on risk factors for violence in psychosis, representing 41 independent samples – 21 from the original and 20 from the updated review – and 203 297 individuals. A total of 30 risk factors were present in ≥3 independent samples. Criminal history factors were associated with the greatest risk of violent outcomes (pooled odds ratio 3.50, 95% CI = 2.37, 5.16), followed by substance misuse factors (odds ratio 2.36, 95% CI = 1.99, 2.80). Many treatment-related factors were protective (odds ratio 0.54, 95% CI = 0.34, 0.85). Effect estimates were attenuated in inpatient settings. We also identified novel risk factors, including cannabis use, in a secondary analysis (odds ratio 3.34, 95% CI = 2.32, 4.82).
Conclusions
Using longitudinal evidence, we have validated comorbid substance misuse and criminal history as major risk factors for violence in psychosis. Novel factors such as cannabis use need further replication. Several identified factors are possible intervention targets if associations are found to be causal.
了解精神病患者暴力的危险因素可以为风险管理和暴力预防提供信息。然而,大部分证据来自横断面研究,以前的评论需要更新。目的从精神分裂症谱系障碍、双相情感障碍或其他情感性精神病患者的暴力危险因素的纵向研究中综合证据。方法检索截至2022年6月的5个文献数据库。我们确定了纵向研究报告了使用DSM或ICD标准诊断为精神分裂症或其他精神病的个体的暴力危险因素。如果有≥3个独立样本报告了危险因素,我们进行随机效应荟萃分析以提供汇总估计。我们还对主要领域的风险因素进行了meta分析。结果:我们确定了47项关于精神病中暴力风险因素的纵向研究,代表41个独立样本——21个来自原始研究,20个来自更新的综述——和203,297个人。≥3个独立样本中共存在30个危险因素。犯罪史因素与暴力结果的最大风险相关(合并优势比为3.50,95% CI = 2.37, 5.16),其次是药物滥用因素(优势比为2.36,95% CI = 1.99, 2.80)。许多治疗相关因素具有保护作用(优势比0.54,95% CI = 0.34, 0.85)。在住院情况下,效应估计减弱。在二次分析中,我们还发现了新的危险因素,包括大麻的使用(优势比3.34,95% CI = 2.32, 4.82)。结论通过纵向证据,我们证实了共病药物滥用和犯罪史是精神病患者暴力的主要危险因素。大麻使用等新因素需要进一步研究。如果发现关联是因果关系,几个已确定的因素可能成为干预目标。