短期(24小时)暴力风险评估工具和有暴力行为风险的青少年暴力风险管理战略:系统审查

IF 3.3 2区 医学 Q1 NURSING
Laura Väätäinen, Maiju Björkqvist, Yan Li, Veikko Pelto-Piri, António Ferreira, Tella Lantta
{"title":"短期(24小时)暴力风险评估工具和有暴力行为风险的青少年暴力风险管理战略:系统审查","authors":"Laura Väätäinen,&nbsp;Maiju Björkqvist,&nbsp;Yan Li,&nbsp;Veikko Pelto-Piri,&nbsp;António Ferreira,&nbsp;Tella Lantta","doi":"10.1111/inm.70110","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Short-term (24 h) violence risk assessment and management can reduce violence in institutional settings, yet they remain understudied in adolescent populations. This systematic review aimed to identify instruments used for short-term violence risk assessment and strategies for managing violence risk among adolescents in institutional settings, as well as to evaluate related outcomes. PRISMA was used as an evidence-based minimum set of items for reporting systematic reviews. The literature search (March 2024 and March 2025) was conducted in PubMed, PsycINFO, Web of Science, CINAHL, The Cochrane Library and Scopus, and references from selected studies were reviewed. Data extraction and analysis were performed in Covidence. Nine studies met inclusion criteria describing six assessment instruments: DASA, DASA-YV, V-RISK-Y, Kennedy Axis V, Pedi-BEWS and BVC. No studies regarding strategies for short-term violence risk management were identified. DASA-YV, BVC and V-RISK-Y predicted violence among adolescents within 24 h (AUC = 0.70–0.95); DASA predicted violence moderately (AUC = 0.50–0.69). Pedi-BEWS (ICC = 0.83) and Kennedy Axis V (ICC = 0.79) demonstrated similar inter-rater reliability. Due to the lack of studies, firm conclusions on the best instrument for clinical practice in institutional settings remained elusive. Further research is necessary to ascertain if youth-specific instruments (e.g., DASA-YV, V-RISK-Y) predict violence more effectively than non-age-specific instruments (e.g., DASA). The lack of youth engagement in violence risk assessment stands out clearly. Scoring was done by the staff, mostly by nurses. Future studies should involve adolescents in the scoring or evaluation of assessment and management. There is a need for evidence-based recommendations for youth engagement.</p>","PeriodicalId":14007,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Mental Health Nursing","volume":"34 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/inm.70110","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Instruments for Short-Term (24 h) Violence Risk Assessment and Strategies for Managing Violence Risk Among Adolescents With Risk for Violent Behaviour: A Systematic Review\",\"authors\":\"Laura Väätäinen,&nbsp;Maiju Björkqvist,&nbsp;Yan Li,&nbsp;Veikko Pelto-Piri,&nbsp;António Ferreira,&nbsp;Tella Lantta\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/inm.70110\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Short-term (24 h) violence risk assessment and management can reduce violence in institutional settings, yet they remain understudied in adolescent populations. This systematic review aimed to identify instruments used for short-term violence risk assessment and strategies for managing violence risk among adolescents in institutional settings, as well as to evaluate related outcomes. PRISMA was used as an evidence-based minimum set of items for reporting systematic reviews. The literature search (March 2024 and March 2025) was conducted in PubMed, PsycINFO, Web of Science, CINAHL, The Cochrane Library and Scopus, and references from selected studies were reviewed. Data extraction and analysis were performed in Covidence. Nine studies met inclusion criteria describing six assessment instruments: DASA, DASA-YV, V-RISK-Y, Kennedy Axis V, Pedi-BEWS and BVC. No studies regarding strategies for short-term violence risk management were identified. DASA-YV, BVC and V-RISK-Y predicted violence among adolescents within 24 h (AUC = 0.70–0.95); DASA predicted violence moderately (AUC = 0.50–0.69). Pedi-BEWS (ICC = 0.83) and Kennedy Axis V (ICC = 0.79) demonstrated similar inter-rater reliability. Due to the lack of studies, firm conclusions on the best instrument for clinical practice in institutional settings remained elusive. Further research is necessary to ascertain if youth-specific instruments (e.g., DASA-YV, V-RISK-Y) predict violence more effectively than non-age-specific instruments (e.g., DASA). The lack of youth engagement in violence risk assessment stands out clearly. Scoring was done by the staff, mostly by nurses. Future studies should involve adolescents in the scoring or evaluation of assessment and management. There is a need for evidence-based recommendations for youth engagement.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":14007,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Mental Health Nursing\",\"volume\":\"34 4\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-08-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/inm.70110\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Mental Health Nursing\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/inm.70110\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"NURSING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Mental Health Nursing","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/inm.70110","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"NURSING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

短期(24小时)暴力风险评估和管理可以减少机构环境中的暴力,但在青少年群体中仍未得到充分研究。本系统综述旨在确定用于短期暴力风险评估的工具和管理机构环境中青少年暴力风险的战略,并评估相关结果。PRISMA被用作报告系统评价的循证最小项目集。在PubMed、PsycINFO、Web of Science、CINAHL、The Cochrane Library和Scopus中检索文献(2024年3月和2025年3月),并对所选研究的参考文献进行综述。在冠状病毒病期间进行数据提取和分析。9项研究符合纳入标准,描述了6种评估工具:DASA、DASA- yv、V- risk - y、Kennedy Axis V、Pedi-BEWS和BVC。没有发现关于短期暴力风险管理战略的研究。DASA-YV、BVC和V-RISK-Y预测青少年24 h内的暴力行为(AUC = 0.70-0.95);DASA中度预测暴力(AUC = 0.50-0.69)。Pedi-BEWS (ICC = 0.83)和Kennedy Axis V (ICC = 0.79)显示出相似的量表间信度。由于缺乏研究,关于机构设置中临床实践的最佳仪器的确切结论仍然难以捉摸。需要进一步研究以确定针对青年的工具(如DASA- yv、V-RISK-Y)是否比非针对年龄的工具(如DASA)更有效地预测暴力。青年缺乏参与暴力风险评估的问题十分突出。评分是由工作人员完成的,主要是护士。未来的研究应涉及青少年的评分或评价的评估和管理。有必要提出以证据为基础的青年参与建议。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Instruments for Short-Term (24 h) Violence Risk Assessment and Strategies for Managing Violence Risk Among Adolescents With Risk for Violent Behaviour: A Systematic Review

Instruments for Short-Term (24 h) Violence Risk Assessment and Strategies for Managing Violence Risk Among Adolescents With Risk for Violent Behaviour: A Systematic Review

Short-term (24 h) violence risk assessment and management can reduce violence in institutional settings, yet they remain understudied in adolescent populations. This systematic review aimed to identify instruments used for short-term violence risk assessment and strategies for managing violence risk among adolescents in institutional settings, as well as to evaluate related outcomes. PRISMA was used as an evidence-based minimum set of items for reporting systematic reviews. The literature search (March 2024 and March 2025) was conducted in PubMed, PsycINFO, Web of Science, CINAHL, The Cochrane Library and Scopus, and references from selected studies were reviewed. Data extraction and analysis were performed in Covidence. Nine studies met inclusion criteria describing six assessment instruments: DASA, DASA-YV, V-RISK-Y, Kennedy Axis V, Pedi-BEWS and BVC. No studies regarding strategies for short-term violence risk management were identified. DASA-YV, BVC and V-RISK-Y predicted violence among adolescents within 24 h (AUC = 0.70–0.95); DASA predicted violence moderately (AUC = 0.50–0.69). Pedi-BEWS (ICC = 0.83) and Kennedy Axis V (ICC = 0.79) demonstrated similar inter-rater reliability. Due to the lack of studies, firm conclusions on the best instrument for clinical practice in institutional settings remained elusive. Further research is necessary to ascertain if youth-specific instruments (e.g., DASA-YV, V-RISK-Y) predict violence more effectively than non-age-specific instruments (e.g., DASA). The lack of youth engagement in violence risk assessment stands out clearly. Scoring was done by the staff, mostly by nurses. Future studies should involve adolescents in the scoring or evaluation of assessment and management. There is a need for evidence-based recommendations for youth engagement.

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
7.60
自引率
8.90%
发文量
128
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Mental Health Nursing is the official journal of the Australian College of Mental Health Nurses Inc. It is a fully refereed journal that examines current trends and developments in mental health practice and research. The International Journal of Mental Health Nursing provides a forum for the exchange of ideas on all issues of relevance to mental health nursing. The Journal informs you of developments in mental health nursing practice and research, directions in education and training, professional issues, management approaches, policy development, ethical questions, theoretical inquiry, and clinical issues. The Journal publishes feature articles, review articles, clinical notes, research notes and book reviews. Contributions on any aspect of mental health nursing are welcomed. Statements and opinions expressed in the journal reflect the views of the authors and are not necessarily endorsed by the Australian College of Mental Health Nurses Inc.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信