The study aims to identify independent predictors of physical restraint in acute psychiatric patients and to determine the predictive power of a risk assessment model centered on psychopathological dimensions. We included 1552 patients admitted to a psychiatric intensive care unit over a 5-year period. Patients were rated on the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS-E) at admission. Principal axis factoring (PAF) with varimax rotation was performed on BPRS-E items to identify psychopathological factors. Multiple logistic regression analysis was performed. PAF pointed six factors: positive symptoms, negative symptoms, resistance, activation, negative affect, and disorganization. Male sex, younger age, proposal for compulsory admission, severity of symptoms, resistance, activation, and disorganizationwere identified as independent predictors.Negative symptoms and negative affect were instead protective factors. The BPRS-E factors, when added to other sociodemographic and clinical variables, significantly increased the predictive power of the model. Our findings suggest that a systematic evaluation of the psychopathological dimensions can be usefully included in the early risk assessment of restraint.

Psychopathological assessment of risk of restraint in acute psychiatric patients / Dazzi, F.; Tarsitani, L.; Di Nunzio, M.; Trincia, V.; Scifoni, G.; Ducci, G.. - In: JOURNAL OF NERVOUS AND MENTAL DISEASE. - ISSN 0022-3018. - 205:6(2017), pp. 458-465. [10.1097/NMD.0000000000000672]

Psychopathological assessment of risk of restraint in acute psychiatric patients

Dazzi F.;Tarsitani L.;Di Nunzio M.;Trincia V.;Scifoni G.;Ducci G.
2017

Abstract

The study aims to identify independent predictors of physical restraint in acute psychiatric patients and to determine the predictive power of a risk assessment model centered on psychopathological dimensions. We included 1552 patients admitted to a psychiatric intensive care unit over a 5-year period. Patients were rated on the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS-E) at admission. Principal axis factoring (PAF) with varimax rotation was performed on BPRS-E items to identify psychopathological factors. Multiple logistic regression analysis was performed. PAF pointed six factors: positive symptoms, negative symptoms, resistance, activation, negative affect, and disorganization. Male sex, younger age, proposal for compulsory admission, severity of symptoms, resistance, activation, and disorganizationwere identified as independent predictors.Negative symptoms and negative affect were instead protective factors. The BPRS-E factors, when added to other sociodemographic and clinical variables, significantly increased the predictive power of the model. Our findings suggest that a systematic evaluation of the psychopathological dimensions can be usefully included in the early risk assessment of restraint.
2017
BPRS; Dimension; Factor analysis; Predictor; Psychopathological assessment; Restraint; Risk factor; Acute Disease; Adult; Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale; Female; Humans; Intensive Care Units; Male; Mental Disorders; Middle Aged; Models, Statistical; Psychiatric Department, Hospital; Restraint, Physical; Retrospective Studies; Risk Assessment
01 Pubblicazione su rivista::01a Articolo in rivista
Psychopathological assessment of risk of restraint in acute psychiatric patients / Dazzi, F.; Tarsitani, L.; Di Nunzio, M.; Trincia, V.; Scifoni, G.; Ducci, G.. - In: JOURNAL OF NERVOUS AND MENTAL DISEASE. - ISSN 0022-3018. - 205:6(2017), pp. 458-465. [10.1097/NMD.0000000000000672]
File allegati a questo prodotto
File Dimensione Formato  
Dazzi_Psychopathological_Assessment_of_Risk_2017.pdf

solo gestori archivio

Tipologia: Versione editoriale (versione pubblicata con il layout dell'editore)
Licenza: Tutti i diritti riservati (All rights reserved)
Dimensione 183.61 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
183.61 kB Adobe PDF   Contatta l'autore

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11573/1620733
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 1
  • Scopus 10
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 6
social impact