Howard Ryland
Stephanie Penney
Alexander Ian Frederic Simpson
Daniel Whiting- 1Department of Psychiatry, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
- 2Oxford Health NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford, United Kingdom
- 3The Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, Toronto, ON, Canada
- 4University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
- 5Institute of Mental Health, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, United Kingdom
- 6Nottinghamshire Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust, Nottingham, United Kingdom
Editorial on the Research Topic
Assessment and management in violence and aggression
Introduction
Absolute rates of violence in mental disorders are low and people with mental illness are similarly likely to be victims as perpetrators of violence (1–3). Violence associated with mental illness is however clinically relevant, as the risk is raised for people with certain mental illnesses relative to the general population (4–6). Violence is an important outcome both for individuals and from a public health perspective (7). Human costs include physical and psychological harms to victims and their families, and negative health, social and criminal justice consequences for perpetrators, such as those resulting from having a criminal conviction (8, 9). Direct economic costs to health systems result from activities such as mandatory or more intensive treatment, with indirect costs accruing to other systems, such as the criminal justice apparatus and across wider society, for example due to lost productivity (10).
While there is evidence that treating mental illness can reduce the risk of violence, it is a complex relationship with multiple causations (11–14). This necessitates a holistic approach to assessment and management that considers individual symptoms, behaviours, interpersonal relationships and social context (15). A better understanding of causal pathways to violence in those with mental illness would enable preventive measures to be developed and appropriately targeted (16). Risk assessment tools could allow insights from epidemiological studies to be operationalised to assist professionals in making more informed decisions across a range of clinical and other settings (17, 18). New strategies to reduce aggression are needed and must be robustly evaluated, such as through appropriately designed clinical trials (19).
New research
This Research Topic brings together five papers examining many of these elements. It spans from investigations of how early childhood experiences relate to adult aggression, to an examination of the characteristics of people receiving mandatory treatment in China.
Recognising that the origin of aggression may lie in our early experiences, Koolschijn et al. studied the effect of childhood maltreatment on several outcomes, including aggression, in a sample of 128 forensic psychiatric patients. These authors found that higher scores on measures of childhood maltreatment were associated with higher aggression and violence risk assessment scores. They highlight the need to consider a patient’s history of maltreatment to guide risk assessment and treatment approaches. Notably, the presence and severity of childhood maltreatment is found to be a risk factor for violence and offending in the general population, as well as in clinical samples. This association has public health implications for prevention and early intervention, as initiatives to combat child maltreatment could be effective at reducing levels of aggression at a population level (20–22).
Schizophrenia is a condition with higher rates of violence compared to the general population, as well as to other forms of mental disorder (4). Sagayadevan et al. explored how schizophrenia symptom severity could mediate the relationship between aggression, impulsivity and quality of life outcomes in a sample of 397 mental health outpatients with schizophrenia-spectrum disorders in Singapore. Their analysis found indirect associations between motor impulsivity and self-control with various aspects of quality of life, through symptom severity. This helps elucidate one possible pathway by which impulsivity may impact on quality of life in this population.
A key step in reducing violent outcomes for clinical populations is to more readily and consistently integrate knowledge of predictors of violence into clinical practice to better individualise treatment (23–25). To do this effectively we need to have robustly validated risk prediction models tailored to the populations they are used in (26). Roaldset et al. validated a new violence risk screening tool for young people called V-RISK-Y, adapted from the well-established V-RISK-10 for adults (27). They found V-RISK-Y had an Area Under the Curve of 0.762 for violent behaviour in 67 adolescents admitted to a Norwegian emergency department. V-RISK-Y was also liked by staff who used it. The authors suggest changes to V-RISK-Y and propose further research to evaluate the revised tool.
An important issue relating to violence in psychiatric inpatient settings is the associated use of restrictive interventions (28). Whilst sometimes essential for safety, the practice raises ethical issues and there is increasing emphasis on minimising its use. Hirsch et al. investigated whether implementing new guidelines reduced coercion in German psychiatric wards. The paper presented here as part of the PreVCo randomised controlled trial (29), examines the baseline characteristics of 55 wards randomly allocated in matched pairs to the new guidelines or waiting list control. Coercion rates varied widely between wards, with an association between the frequency of coercive measures used and the percentage of involuntarily admitted cases. There was no difference in the rates of coercion between wards assigned to the intervention versus controls. Fidelity of guideline implementation also varied considerably among intervention wards. The paucity of randomised evidence of this nature in forensic settings is notable, so this study is significant for overcoming the many practical and ethical barriers to such work (30).
Concerns regarding imminent risk of violence is associated with mandatory treatment under many international mental health legal frameworks (31). Qiu et al. studied the characteristics of people subject to mandatory treatment in China under the Criminal Procedures Law of 2013. They found a year-on-year increase in the number of people subject to this provision from 2013, when the law was instituted, to 2019, followed by a sharp decline in 2020 and 2021, coinciding with the Covid-19 pandemic and associated restrictions. Most applications for mandatory treatment were approved and schizophrenia was the commonest diagnosis for people subject to mandatory treatment.
Conclusion
This Research Topic highlights several key research priorities in violence risk assessment (32). It is encouraging to see systematic attempts to understand the origins and patterns of violence in people with serious mental illness, as this can advance efforts to provide more tailored interventions for different types of violence and symptoms. Risk assessment tools require careful refinement for utility and efficiency, to ensure they are operating in expected ways within the specific population of interest. As compared to other fields of medicine, evidence from randomised controlled trials is lacking, and the efforts of Hirsch et al. are especially notable in this regard. Finally, systems-level approaches, such as the one adopted by Qui et al., are under-utilised, but vital to place patient- and ward-level findings on the association between mental illness and violence in their appropriate context.
Author contributions
HR: Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. SP: Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. AS: Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. DW: Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
The author(s) declared that they were an editorial board member of Frontiers, at the time of submission. This had no impact on the peer review process and the final decision.
Publisher’s note
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
References
1. Whiting D, Lichtenstein P, Fazel S. Violence and mental disorders: a structured review of associations by individual diagnoses, risk factors, and risk assessment. Lancet Psychiatry. (2021) 8:150–61. doi: 10.1016/S2215-0366(20)30262-5
2. Sariaslan A, Arseneault L, Larsson H, Lichtenstein P, Fazel S. Risk of subjection to violence and perpetration of violence in persons with psychiatric disorders in Sweden. JAMA Psychiatry. (2020) 77(4):359–67. doi: 10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2019.4275
3. Casiano H, Hensel JM, Chartier MJ, Ekuma O, MacWilliam L, Mota N, et al. The intersection between criminal accusations, victimization, and mental disorders: A canadian population-based study. Can J Psychiatry. (2020) 65(7):492–501. doi: 10.1177/0706743720919660
4. Whiting D, Gulati G, Geddes JR, Fazel S. Association of schizophrenia spectrum disorders and violence perpetration in adults and adolescents from 15 countries: A systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA Psychiatry. (2022) 79(2):120–32. doi: 10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2021.3721
5. Iozzino L, Ferrari C, Large M, de Girolamo G. Prevalence and risk factors of violence by psychiatric acute inpatients: A systematic review and meta-analysis. PloS One. (2015) 10(6):e0128536–e0128536. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0128536
6. Elbogen EB, Johnson SC. The intricate link between violence and mental disorder: results from the national epidemiologic survey on alcohol and related conditions. Arch Gen Psychiatry. (2009) 66:152–61. doi: 10.1001/archgenpsychiatry.2008.537
7. Varshney M, Mahapatra A, Krishnan V, Gupta R, Deb KS. Violence and mental illness: what is the true story? J Epidemiol Community Health. (2016) 70(3):223–5. doi: 10.1136/jech-2015-205546
8. Wildman EK, MacManus D, Harvey J, Kuipers E, Onwumere J. Prevalence of violence by people living with severe mental illness against their relatives and its associated impacts: A systematic review. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica. (2023) 147(2):155–74. doi: 10.1111/acps.13516
9. Bhavsar V, Ventriglio A. Violence, victimization and mental health. Int J Soc Psychiatry. (2017) 63:475–9. doi: 10.1177/0020764017719919
10. Senior M, Fazel S and Tsiachristas A. The economic impact of violence perpetration in severe mental illness: a retrospective, prevalence-based analysis in England and Wales. Lancet Public Health. (2020) 5:e99–e106. doi: 10.1016/S2468-2667(19)30245-2
11. Rampling J, Furtado V, Winsper C, Marwaha S, Lucca G, Livanou M, et al. Non-pharmacological interventions for reducing aggression and violence in serious mental illness: A systematic review and narrative synthesis. Eur Psychiatry. (2016) 34:17–28. doi: 10.1016/j.eurpsy.2016.01.2422
12. Reisegger A, Slamanig R, Winkler H, de Girolamo G, Carrà G, Crocamo C, et al. Pharmacological interventions to reduce violence in patients with schizophrenia in forensic psychiatry. CNS Spectr. (2021) 5:1–11. doi: 10.1017/s1092852921000134
13. Slamanig R, Reisegger A, Winkler H, de Girolamo G, Carrà G, Crocamo C, et al. A systematic review of non-pharmacological strategies to reduce the risk of violence in patients with schizophrenia spectrum disorders in forensic settings. Front Psychiatry. (2021) 12:618860. doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2021.618860
14. Strassnig MT, Nascimento V, Deckler E, Harvey PD. Pharmacological treatment of violence in schizophrenia. CNS Spectrums. (2020) 25(2):207–15. doi: 10.1017/S1092852919001226
15. Halle C, Tzani-Pepelasi C, Pylarinou N-R, Fumagalli A. The link between mental health, crime and violence. New Ideas Psychol. (2020) 58:100779. doi: 10.1016/j.newideapsych.2020.100779
16. Coid JW, Ullrich S, Kallis C, Keers R, Barker D, Cowden F, et al. The relationship between delusions and violence: findings from the east london first episode psychosis study. JAMA Psychiatry. (2013) 70(5):465–71. doi: 10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2013.12
17. Ramesh T, Igoumenou A, Vazquez Montes M, Fazel S. Use of risk assessment instruments to predict violence in forensic psychiatric hospitals: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Psychiatry. (2018) 52:47–53. doi: 10.1016/j.eurpsy.2018.02.007
18. Douglas T, Pugh J, Singh I, Savulescu J, Fazel S. Risk assessment tools in criminal justice and forensic psychiatry: The need for better data. Eur Psychiatry. (2017) 42:134–7. doi: 10.1016/j.eurpsy.2016.12.009
19. Burns T. Psychiatry does need more randomised controlled trials. Br J Psychiatry. (2019) 214:52–2. doi: 10.1192/bjp.2018.216
20. Almeida TC, Cardoso J, Matos AF, Murça A, Cunha O. Adverse childhood experiences and aggression in adulthood: The moderating role of positive childhood experiences. Child Abuse Negl. (2024) 154:106929. doi: 10.1016/j.chiabu.2024.106929
21. Graf GH-J, Chihuri S, Blow M, Li G. Adverse childhood experiences and justice system contact: A systematic review. Pediatrics. (2021) 147(1). doi: 10.1542/peds.2020-021030
22. Ranu J, Kalebic N, Melendez-Torres GJ, et al. Association between adverse childhood experiences and a combination of psychosis and violence among adults: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Trauma Violence Abuse. (2023) 24:2997–3013. doi: 10.1177/15248380221122818
23. Chen L. Overview of clinical prediction models. Ann Transl Med. (2020) 8:71. doi: 10.21037/atm.2019.11.121
24. Zanardi R, Prestifilippo D, Fabbri C, et al. Precision psychiatry in clinical practice. Int J Psychiatry Clin Pract. (2021) 25:19–27. doi: 10.1080/13651501.2020.1809680
25. Penney SR, Marshall LA, Simpson AI. The assessment of dynamic risk among forensic psychiatric patients transitioning to the community. Law Hum Behav. (2016) 40(4):374–86. doi: 10.1037/lhb0000183
26. Sperrin M, Riley RD, Collins GS, Martin GP. Targeted validation: validating clinical prediction models in their intended population and setting. Diagn Prognostic Res. (2022) 6(1):24. doi: 10.1186/s41512-022-00136-8
27. Roaldset JO, Lockertsen ØChecktae, Gustavsen CC, Landheim T, Bjørkly SK. Comparison of V-RISK-Y and V-RISK-10 for risk of violence: A one-year study from a psychiatric emergency department for adolescents. Asian J Psychiatry. (2024) 96:104044. doi: 10.1016/j.ajp.2024.104044
28. Hassiotis A, Almvik R, Fluttert F. Coercion as a response to violence in mental health-care settings. Lancet Psychiatry. (2022) 9(1):6–8. doi: 10.1016/S2215-0366(21)00476-4
29. Steinert T, Baumgardt J, Bechdolf A, Bühling-Schindowski F, Cole C, Flammer E. Implementation of guidelines on prevention of coercion and violence (PreVCo) in psychiatry: a multicentre randomised controlled trial. Lancet Regional Health – Europe. (2023) 35. doi: 10.1016/j.lanepe.2023.100770
30. Tully J, Hafferty J, Whiting D, Dean K, Fazel S. Forensic mental health: envisioning a more empirical future. Lancet Psychiatry. 11(11):934–42. doi: 10.1016/S2215-0366(24)00164-0
Keywords: aggression, violence, forensic, mental health, risk, prediction
Citation: Ryland H, Penney S, Simpson AIF and Whiting D (2024) Editorial: Assessment and management in violence and aggression. Front. Psychiatry 15:1519741. doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2024.1519741
Received: 30 October 2024; Accepted: 11 November 2024;
Published: 02 December 2024.
Edited and Reviewed by:
Birgit Angela Völlm, University of Rostock, GermanyCopyright © 2024 Ryland, Penney, Simpson and Whiting. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
*Correspondence: Howard Ryland, aG93YXJkLnJ5bGFuZEBwc3ljaC5veC5hYy51aw==