Marian E Betz, Shannon Frattaroli, Christopher E Knoepke, Rachel Johnson, Annette Christy, Julia P Schleimer, Veronica A Pear, Megan McCarthy, Reena Kapoor, Michael A Norko, Ali Rowhani-Rahbar, Wenjuan Ma, Garen J Wintemute, Jeffrey W Swanson, April M Zeoli
{"title":"美国六个州老年人的极端风险保护令:描述性研究。","authors":"Marian E Betz, Shannon Frattaroli, Christopher E Knoepke, Rachel Johnson, Annette Christy, Julia P Schleimer, Veronica A Pear, Megan McCarthy, Reena Kapoor, Michael A Norko, Ali Rowhani-Rahbar, Wenjuan Ma, Garen J Wintemute, Jeffrey W Swanson, April M Zeoli","doi":"10.1080/07317115.2023.2254279","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Extreme Risk Protection Orders (ERPOs) allow a court to restrict firearm access for individuals (\"respondents\") at imminent risk of harm to self/others. Little is known about ERPOs use for older adults, a population with higher rates of suicide and dementia.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We abstracted ERPO cases through June 30, 2020, from California, Colorado, Connecticut, Florida, Maryland, and Washington. We restricted our analysis to petitions for older (≥65 years) respondents, stratified by documented cognitive impairment.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among 6,699 ERPO petitions, 672 (10.0%) were for older adults; 13.7% (<i>n</i> = 92) of these noted cognitive impairment. Most were white (75.7%) men (90.2%). Cognitively impaired (vs. non-impaired) respondents were older (mean age 78.2 vs 72.7 years) and more likely to have documented irrational/erratic behavior (30.4% vs 15.7%), but less likely to have documented suicidality (33.7% vs 55.0%). At the time of the petition, 56.2% of older adult respondents had documented firearm access (median accessible firearms = 3, range 1-160).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Approximately 14% of ERPO petitions for older adults involved cognitive impairment; one-third of these noted suicide risk. Studies examining ERPO implementation across states may inform usage and awareness.</p><p><strong>Clinical implications: </strong>ERPOs may reduce firearm access among older adults with cognitive impairment, suicidality, or risk of violence.</p>","PeriodicalId":10376,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Gerontologist","volume":" ","pages":"536-543"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11229607/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Extreme Risk Protection Orders in Older Adults in Six U.S. States: A Descriptive Study.\",\"authors\":\"Marian E Betz, Shannon Frattaroli, Christopher E Knoepke, Rachel Johnson, Annette Christy, Julia P Schleimer, Veronica A Pear, Megan McCarthy, Reena Kapoor, Michael A Norko, Ali Rowhani-Rahbar, Wenjuan Ma, Garen J Wintemute, Jeffrey W Swanson, April M Zeoli\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/07317115.2023.2254279\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Extreme Risk Protection Orders (ERPOs) allow a court to restrict firearm access for individuals (\\\"respondents\\\") at imminent risk of harm to self/others. Little is known about ERPOs use for older adults, a population with higher rates of suicide and dementia.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We abstracted ERPO cases through June 30, 2020, from California, Colorado, Connecticut, Florida, Maryland, and Washington. We restricted our analysis to petitions for older (≥65 years) respondents, stratified by documented cognitive impairment.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among 6,699 ERPO petitions, 672 (10.0%) were for older adults; 13.7% (<i>n</i> = 92) of these noted cognitive impairment. Most were white (75.7%) men (90.2%). Cognitively impaired (vs. non-impaired) respondents were older (mean age 78.2 vs 72.7 years) and more likely to have documented irrational/erratic behavior (30.4% vs 15.7%), but less likely to have documented suicidality (33.7% vs 55.0%). At the time of the petition, 56.2% of older adult respondents had documented firearm access (median accessible firearms = 3, range 1-160).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Approximately 14% of ERPO petitions for older adults involved cognitive impairment; one-third of these noted suicide risk. Studies examining ERPO implementation across states may inform usage and awareness.</p><p><strong>Clinical implications: </strong>ERPOs may reduce firearm access among older adults with cognitive impairment, suicidality, or risk of violence.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10376,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical Gerontologist\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"536-543\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11229607/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical Gerontologist\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/07317115.2023.2254279\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/9/9 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Gerontologist","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/07317115.2023.2254279","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/9/9 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Extreme Risk Protection Orders in Older Adults in Six U.S. States: A Descriptive Study.
Objectives: Extreme Risk Protection Orders (ERPOs) allow a court to restrict firearm access for individuals ("respondents") at imminent risk of harm to self/others. Little is known about ERPOs use for older adults, a population with higher rates of suicide and dementia.
Methods: We abstracted ERPO cases through June 30, 2020, from California, Colorado, Connecticut, Florida, Maryland, and Washington. We restricted our analysis to petitions for older (≥65 years) respondents, stratified by documented cognitive impairment.
Results: Among 6,699 ERPO petitions, 672 (10.0%) were for older adults; 13.7% (n = 92) of these noted cognitive impairment. Most were white (75.7%) men (90.2%). Cognitively impaired (vs. non-impaired) respondents were older (mean age 78.2 vs 72.7 years) and more likely to have documented irrational/erratic behavior (30.4% vs 15.7%), but less likely to have documented suicidality (33.7% vs 55.0%). At the time of the petition, 56.2% of older adult respondents had documented firearm access (median accessible firearms = 3, range 1-160).
Conclusions: Approximately 14% of ERPO petitions for older adults involved cognitive impairment; one-third of these noted suicide risk. Studies examining ERPO implementation across states may inform usage and awareness.
Clinical implications: ERPOs may reduce firearm access among older adults with cognitive impairment, suicidality, or risk of violence.
期刊介绍:
Clinical Gerontologist presents original research, reviews, and clinical comments relevant to the needs of behavioral health professionals and all practitioners who work with older adults. Published in cooperation with Psychologists in Long Term Care, the journal is designed for psychologists, physicians, nurses, social workers, counselors (family, pastoral, and vocational), and other health professionals who address behavioral health concerns found in later life, including:
-adjustments to changing roles-
issues related to diversity and aging-
family caregiving-
spirituality-
cognitive and psychosocial assessment-
depression, anxiety, and PTSD-
Alzheimer’s disease and other neurocognitive disorders-
long term care-
behavioral medicine in aging-
rehabilitation and education for older adults.
Each issue provides insightful articles on current topics. Submissions are peer reviewed by content experts and selected for both scholarship and relevance to the practitioner to ensure that the articles are among the best in the field. Authors report original research and conceptual reviews. A unique column in Clinical Gerontologist is “Clinical Comments." This section features brief observations and specific suggestions from practitioners which avoid elaborate research designs or long reference lists. This section is a unique opportunity for you to learn about the valuable clinical work of your peers in a short, concise format.