社区治疗令对精神疾病患者攻击或犯罪行为影响的系统回顾和荟萃分析。

IF 5.9 2区 医学 Q1 PSYCHIATRY
S Kisely, C Bull, N Gill
{"title":"社区治疗令对精神疾病患者攻击或犯罪行为影响的系统回顾和荟萃分析。","authors":"S Kisely, C Bull, N Gill","doi":"10.1017/S2045796025000058","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aims: </strong>There has been concern about violent acts and other criminal behaviour by people with a possible history of mental health problems. We therefore assessed the effects of community treatment orders (CTOs) on self-, third-party-, and agency-reported criminal behaviour when compared to voluntary treatment.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic search of PubMed/Medline, Embase, PsycINFO and criminal justice bibliographic databases for observational or randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing CTO cases with controls receiving voluntary psychiatric treatment. Relevant outcomes were reports of violence and aggression or contacts with the criminal justice system such as arrests and court appearances.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Thirteen papers from 11 studies met inclusion criteria. Nine papers came from the United States and four from Australia. Two papers were of RCTs. Results for all outcomes were non-significant, the effect size declining as study design improved from non-randomised data on self-reported criminal behaviour, through third party criminal justice records and finally to RCTs. Similarly, there was no significant finding in the subgroup analysis of serious criminal behaviour.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>On the limited available evidence, CTOs may not address aggression or criminal behaviour in people with mental illness. This is possibly because the risk of violence is increased by comorbid or nonclinical variables, which are beyond the scope of CTOs. These include substance use, a history of victimisation or maltreatment, and the wider environment. The management of risk should therefore focus on the whole person and their community through social and public health interventions, not solely legislative control.</p>","PeriodicalId":11787,"journal":{"name":"Epidemiology and Psychiatric Sciences","volume":"34 ","pages":"e12"},"PeriodicalIF":5.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11886974/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A systematic review and meta-analysis of the effect of community treatment orders on aggression or criminal behaviour in people with a mental illness.\",\"authors\":\"S Kisely, C Bull, N Gill\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/S2045796025000058\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Aims: </strong>There has been concern about violent acts and other criminal behaviour by people with a possible history of mental health problems. We therefore assessed the effects of community treatment orders (CTOs) on self-, third-party-, and agency-reported criminal behaviour when compared to voluntary treatment.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic search of PubMed/Medline, Embase, PsycINFO and criminal justice bibliographic databases for observational or randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing CTO cases with controls receiving voluntary psychiatric treatment. Relevant outcomes were reports of violence and aggression or contacts with the criminal justice system such as arrests and court appearances.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Thirteen papers from 11 studies met inclusion criteria. Nine papers came from the United States and four from Australia. Two papers were of RCTs. Results for all outcomes were non-significant, the effect size declining as study design improved from non-randomised data on self-reported criminal behaviour, through third party criminal justice records and finally to RCTs. Similarly, there was no significant finding in the subgroup analysis of serious criminal behaviour.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>On the limited available evidence, CTOs may not address aggression or criminal behaviour in people with mental illness. This is possibly because the risk of violence is increased by comorbid or nonclinical variables, which are beyond the scope of CTOs. These include substance use, a history of victimisation or maltreatment, and the wider environment. The management of risk should therefore focus on the whole person and their community through social and public health interventions, not solely legislative control.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":11787,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Epidemiology and Psychiatric Sciences\",\"volume\":\"34 \",\"pages\":\"e12\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-02-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11886974/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Epidemiology and Psychiatric Sciences\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/S2045796025000058\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHIATRY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Epidemiology and Psychiatric Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S2045796025000058","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:人们一直关注可能有精神病史的人的暴力行为和其他犯罪行为。因此,与自愿治疗相比,我们评估了社区治疗令(CTOs)对自我、第三方和机构报告的犯罪行为的影响。方法:系统检索PubMed/Medline、Embase、PsycINFO和刑事司法文献数据库,进行观察性或随机对照试验(rct),比较CTO病例与接受自愿精神治疗的对照组。相关的结果是关于暴力和侵略的报告或与刑事司法系统的接触,如逮捕和出庭。结果:来自11项研究的13篇论文符合纳入标准。9篇论文来自美国,4篇来自澳大利亚。两篇论文为随机对照试验。所有结果的结果都不显著,随着研究设计的改进,从自我报告的犯罪行为的非随机数据,通过第三方刑事司法记录,最后到随机对照试验,效应量下降。同样,在严重犯罪行为的亚组分析中也没有显著的发现。结论:在有限的现有证据下,cto可能无法解决精神疾病患者的攻击或犯罪行为。这可能是因为共病或非临床变量增加了暴力的风险,而这些变量超出了cto的范围。这些因素包括物质使用、受害或虐待史以及更广泛的环境。因此,风险管理应通过社会和公共卫生干预措施,而不仅仅是立法控制,把重点放在整个人及其社区上。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A systematic review and meta-analysis of the effect of community treatment orders on aggression or criminal behaviour in people with a mental illness.

Aims: There has been concern about violent acts and other criminal behaviour by people with a possible history of mental health problems. We therefore assessed the effects of community treatment orders (CTOs) on self-, third-party-, and agency-reported criminal behaviour when compared to voluntary treatment.

Methods: A systematic search of PubMed/Medline, Embase, PsycINFO and criminal justice bibliographic databases for observational or randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing CTO cases with controls receiving voluntary psychiatric treatment. Relevant outcomes were reports of violence and aggression or contacts with the criminal justice system such as arrests and court appearances.

Results: Thirteen papers from 11 studies met inclusion criteria. Nine papers came from the United States and four from Australia. Two papers were of RCTs. Results for all outcomes were non-significant, the effect size declining as study design improved from non-randomised data on self-reported criminal behaviour, through third party criminal justice records and finally to RCTs. Similarly, there was no significant finding in the subgroup analysis of serious criminal behaviour.

Conclusions: On the limited available evidence, CTOs may not address aggression or criminal behaviour in people with mental illness. This is possibly because the risk of violence is increased by comorbid or nonclinical variables, which are beyond the scope of CTOs. These include substance use, a history of victimisation or maltreatment, and the wider environment. The management of risk should therefore focus on the whole person and their community through social and public health interventions, not solely legislative control.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.80
自引率
1.20%
发文量
121
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Epidemiology and Psychiatric Sciences is a prestigious international, peer-reviewed journal that has been publishing in Open Access format since 2020. Formerly known as Epidemiologia e Psichiatria Sociale and established in 1992 by Michele Tansella, the journal prioritizes highly relevant and innovative research articles and systematic reviews in the areas of public mental health and policy, mental health services and system research, as well as epidemiological and social psychiatry. Join us in advancing knowledge and understanding in these critical fields.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信