Clinical Decisions in Psychiatry Should Not Be Based On Risk Assessment

Author:

Ryan Christopher1,Nielssen Olav2,Paton Michael3,Large Matthew4

Affiliation:

1. Discipline of Psychiatry and the Centre for Values, Ethics and the Law in Medicine, University of Sydney and Westmead Hospital, Westmead, NSW, Australia

2. Clinical Research Unit for Anxiety Disorders, School of Psychiatry, UNSW at St Vincent's Hospital, Sydney, NSW, Australia

3. Area Mental Health Drug and Alcohol Service, Northern Sydney Central Coast Area Health Service, Macquarie Hospital, Sydney, NSW, Australia

4. The Prince of Wales Hospital and Conjoint Senior Lecturer, School of Psychiatry, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, Australia

Abstract

Objective: Risk assessments that place patients in high or low risk categories have been widely adopted by mental health services in an attempt to reduce the harms associated with psychiatric disorders. This paper examines the effects of categorization based on the results of a risk assessment. Methods: The violence prediction instrument derived from the MacArthur Study of Mental Disorder and Violence was used to illustrate the nature and effects of risk assessment and the consequent categorization of patients. Results: The majority of patients categorized as being at high risk will not commit any harmful acts. Conclusions: Patients who are classified as high risk share the cost of efforts to reduce harm in the form of additional treatment and restrictions, although the majority will not go on to commit a harmful act. Clinical decisions made on the basis of risk assessment also divert resources away from patients classified as low risk, even though a significant proportion do go on to a commit harmful act. We argue that psychiatric professionals should discuss the risks of treatment and of non-treatment with patients (or with their substitute decision-makers) and should maintain a duty to warn about the consequences of not having treatment. However, assessment of risk of harm should not form the basis for clinical decision making. We should aim to provide optimal care according to the treatment needs of each patient, regardless of the perceived risk of adverse events.

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Subject

Psychiatry and Mental health

Cited by 101 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3