10
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
2 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Forensic psychiatry and Covid-19: accelerating transformation in forensic psychiatry

      in-brief

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Swift medically led scientifically informed responses to the Covid-19 epidemic nationally have been demonstrably superior to other, non-scientific approaches. In forensic psychiatry and across all psychiatric services, urgent and clinically led responses have underlined redundancies and confusions in the governance of mental health services and a vacuum in policy makers. For the future, a greater emphasis on services for patients with schizophrenia and other severe, enduring mental disorders must aim at reducing standardised mortality ratios, managing risk of violence and improving hard outcomes such as symptomatic remission, functional recovery and forensic recovery of autonomy. This will require more use of information technology at service level and at national level where Scandinavian-style population-based data linkage research must now become legally sanctioned and necessary. A national research and development centre for medical excellence in forensic psychiatry is urgently required and is complimentary to and different from quality management.

          Related collections

          Most cited references46

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Prisons and custodial settings are part of a comprehensive response to COVID-19

          Prisons are epicentres for infectious diseases because of the higher background prevalence of infection, the higher levels of risk factors for infection, the unavoidable close contact in often overcrowded, poorly ventilated, and unsanitary facilities, and the poor access to health-care services relative to that in community settings. 1 Infections can be transmitted between prisoners, staff and visitors, between prisons through transfers and staff cross-deployment, and to and from the community. As such, prisons and other custodial settings are an integral part of the public health response to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). One of the first documented influenza outbreaks in prison occurred in San Quentin prison in California, USA, during the 1918 influenza pandemic. In three separate instances, infection was introduced by a newly received prisoner, and a single transfer to another prison resulted in an outbreak there. Isolation was central to containment. 2 More recently, prison influenza outbreaks have been described in the USA, Canada, Australia, Taiwan, and Thailand.3, 4 We are unaware of any published reports of influenza outbreaks in youth detention or immigration detention centres, although modelling suggests that outbreaks would progress similarly in these settings. 5 Since early 2020, COVID-19 outbreaks have been documented worldwide, including Iran, where 70 000 prisoners have been released in an effort to reduce in-custody transmission. 6 Prisons concentrate individuals who are susceptible to infection and those with a higher risk of complications. COVID-19 has an increased mortality in older people and in those with chronic diseases or immunosuppression. Notably, multimorbidity is normative among people in prison, often with earlier onset and greater severity than in the general population, and prison populations are ageing in many countries. 7 Furthermore, inadequate investment in prison health, substantial overcrowding in some prison settings, and rigid security processess have the potential to delay diagnosis and treatment. As such, COVID-19 outbreaks in custodial settings are of importance for public health, for at least two reasons: first, that explosive outbreaks in these settings have the potential to overwhelm prison health-care services and place additional demands on overburdened specialist facilities in the community; and second, that, with an estimated 30 million people released from custody each year globally, prisons are a vector for community transmission that will disproportionately impact marginalised communities. What must be done to mitigate the impact of large outbreaks of COVID-19 in prisons? The public health importance of prison responses to influenza outbreaks has been recognised in the USA, 8 where the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention have developed a checklist for pandemic influenza preparedness in correctional settings. WHO has also issued prison-specific guidance for responding to COVID-19 (panel ). 9 Panel Prison-specific guidance for responding to COVID-19 Joint planning Include prison health and correctional authorities in the overall public health response, rather than permitting them to plan and operate in isolation. Risk management Design and implement adequate systems for limiting importation and exportation of cases from or to the community, and transmission and spread within prisons. Prevention and control Develop protocols for entry screening, personal protection measures, social distancing, environmental cleaning and disinfection, and restriction of movement, including limitation of transfers and access for non-essential staff and visitors. Treatment Explicitly and transparently align prison health systems with the wider health and emergency planning systems, including transfer protocols for patients requiring specialised care. Isolate cases and contacts if required to control the spread of infection in prisons. However, special consideration of the potentially serious mental health effects of isolation in these settings is essential.10, 11 In high-income countries, maintaining isolation without depriving incarcerated people of human contact might be possible. 12 Information sharing Close collaboration between health and justice ministries should be established to ensure continuity of information, which is a crucial component of an effective, coordinated, whole-of-government response. Governance of prison health by a ministry of health, rather than a ministry of justice or similar, is likely to facilitate timely information sharing. 13 Prison health is public health by definition. Despite this and the very porous borders between prisons and communities, prisons are often excluded or treated as separate from public health efforts. The fast spread of COVID-19 will, like most epidemics, disproportionately affect the most disadvantaged people. Therefore, to mitigate the effects of prison outbreaks on tertiary health-care facilities and reduce morbidity and mortality among society's most marginalised, it is crucial that prisons, youth detention centres, and immigration detention centres are embedded within the broader public health response.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Comorbidities and mortality in persons with schizophrenia: a Swedish national cohort study.

            Schizophrenia is associated with premature mortality, but the specific causes and pathways are unclear. The authors used outpatient and inpatient data for a national population to examine the association between schizophrenia and mortality and comorbidities. This was a national cohort study of 6,097,834 Swedish adults, including 8,277 with schizophrenia, followed for 7 years (2003-2009) for mortality and comorbidities diagnosed in any outpatient or inpatient setting nationwide. On average, men with schizophrenia died 15 years earlier, and women 12 years earlier, than the rest of the population, and this was not accounted for by unnatural deaths. The leading causes were ischemic heart disease and cancer. Despite having twice as many health care system contacts, schizophrenia patients had no increased risk of nonfatal ischemic heart disease or cancer diagnoses, but they had an elevated mortality from ischemic heart disease (adjusted hazard ratio for women, 3.33 [95% CI=2.73-4.05]; for men, 2.20 [95% CI=1.83-2.65]) and cancer (adjusted hazard ratio for women, 1.71 [95% CI=1.38-2.10; for men, 1.44 [95% CI=1.15-1.80]). Among all people who died from ischemic heart disease or cancer, schizophrenia patients were less likely than others to have been diagnosed previously with these conditions (for ischemic heart disease, 26.3% compared with 43.7%; for cancer, 73.9% compared with 82.3%). The association between schizophrenia and mortality was stronger among women and the employed. Lack of antipsychotic treatment was also associated with elevated mortality. Schizophrenia patients had markedly premature mortality, and the leading causes were ischemic heart disease and cancer, which appeared to be underdiagnosed. Preventive interventions should prioritize primary health care tailored to this population, including more effective risk modification and screening for cardiovascular disease and cancer.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Mortality rate trends in patients diagnosed with schizophrenia or bipolar disorder: a nationwide study with 20 years of follow-up

              Background Patients with severe mental illness (SMI) have a reduced life expectancy of one to two decades as compared to the general population, with most years of life lost due to somatic diseases. Most previous studies on disorders constituting SMI, e.g. schizophrenia and bipolar disorder, have investigated the disorders separately and hence not compared the disorders in terms of mortality rates relative to the background population. Methods A register-based cohort study including the entire Danish population comparing mortality rates relative to the background population, controlling for age and sex, i.e. standardized mortality ratios (SMRs) in patients diagnosed with schizophrenia with those in patients diagnosed with bipolar disorder, during the study period from 1995 to 2014. Results The SMR of patients with SMI was significantly higher than one for each calendar year in the study period with an overall SMR of 4.58, 95% CI (4.48–4.69) in patients diagnosed with schizophrenia (n = 38,500) and of 2.57 (95% CI 2.49–2.65) in patients diagnosed with bipolar disorder (n = 23,092). When investigating time trends in SMR for schizophrenia and for bipolar disorder, respectively, an increase in SMR over time was shown with a mean increase of 0.03 per year for schizophrenia and 0.02 for bipolar disorder (p < 0.01 for both disorders). The ratio between SMR for schizophrenia and SMR for bipolar disorder for each calendar year over the study period was constant (p = 0.756). Conclusions Increasing SMRs over the last 20 years were found for both patients diagnosed with bipolar disorder and patients diagnosed with schizophrenia. Despite clear differences between the two disorders regarding SMRs, the increases in SMR over time were similar, which could suggest similar underlying factors influencing mortality rates in both disorders.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Ir J Psychol Med
                Ir J Psychol Med
                IPM
                Irish Journal of Psychological Medicine
                Cambridge University Press (Cambridge, UK )
                0790-9667
                2051-6967
                21 May 2020
                : 1-9
                Affiliations
                [ 1 ]National Forensic Mental Health Service, Central Mental Hospital , Dundrum, Dublin, Ireland
                [ 2 ]Academic Department of Psychiatry, Trinity College Dublin , Dublin, Ireland
                Author notes
                [* ]Address for correspondence: H. G. Kennedy, National Forensic Mental Health Service, Central Mental Hospital, Dundrum, Dublin, Ireland. (Email: kennedh@ 123456tcd.ie )
                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3174-3272
                Article
                S0790966720000580
                10.1017/ipm.2020.58
                7556898
                32434610
                067fb68f-504c-4bf3-99cf-f24f7e23f9c5
                © College of Psychiatrists of Ireland 2020

                This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 20 April 2020
                : 12 May 2020
                : 16 May 2020
                Page count
                References: 82, Pages: 9
                Categories
                Perspective Piece

                Comments

                Comment on this article