ArticleGesundheitswesen (Bundesverband der Arzte des Offentlichen Gesundheitsdienstes (Germany))2024
[Professionals' Views On Forensic-Psychiatric Patients With Intellectual Disability: Impact Of Structural, Systemic And Diagnosis-Related Aspects On Treatment And Release].
Article in Gesundheitswesen (Bundesverband der Arzte des Offentlichen Gesundheitsdienstes (Germany)), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In forensic psychiatric clinics, patients who have committed a criminal offense on the basis of intellectual disability are also treated in according to Sect. 63 of the German Criminal Code. This group of patients has above-average lengths of stay and specific difficulties in treatment and in transition to aftercare systems are reported from practice. The present study is based on a content-analytical evaluation of ten structured interviews with practitioners of different professions who are familiar with the treatment of this patient group in forensic psychiatry. The aim was to identify treatment experiences and challenges of inpatient forensic care for this group as well as needs for change and suggestions for improvement. Respondents confirmed the specific treatment needs and person- and diagnosis-related challenges known from other studies, which were considered to be causally related to prolonged hospital stay and problems at discharge. Numerous structural and systemic barriers were also identified that impede the shortest possible forensic inpatient care and seamless transition to the non-forensic aftercare system. At the structural level, these included the need for human resources (both quantitative and qualitative) and adapted treatment concepts. Professional aftercare was considered very important for this group of patients. In this regard, the non-availability of suitable institutions, long waiting lists and reservations on the part of these institutions towards former forensic patients were identified as problems. The fact that patients with intellectual disability were less able to make their needs known than other patients and thus often received less attention from the treatment providers can be described as a systemic obstacle. This also applies to the rather high demands that the forensic system, with its goal of "improvement" through treatment, also places on people with intellectual disability. The findings of this study can contribute to improvement of the forensic inpatient care of people with intellectual disability at systemic and structural levels.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.