The British Journal of Psychiatry (2007) 190: 509-514. doi: 10.1192/bjp.bp.106.023044
© 2007 The Royal College of Psychiatrists
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit an eLetter
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Related articles in BJP
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via CrossRef
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by COID, J. W.
Right arrow Articles by YANG, M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by COID, J. W.
Right arrow Articles by YANG, M.

Comparison of outcomes following after-care from forensic and general adult psychiatric services

JEREMY W. COID, MD

Forensic Psychiatry Research Unit, St Bartholomew’s Hospital, London

NICOLE HICKEY, MSc

Young Abusers Project, Peckwater Resource Centre, London

MIN YANG, MPH

Forensic Psychiatry Research Unit, St Bartholomew’s Hospital, London, UK

Correspondence: Professor Jeremy Coid, Forensic Psychiatry Research Unit, St Bartholomew’s Hospital, 61 Bartholomew Close, London EC1A 7BE, UK. Tel: +44 (0)20 7601 8138; email: j.w.coid{at}qmul.ac.uk

Declaration of interest J.W.C. developed a specialist service evaluated in this study.

Background Forensic psychiatry services are expanding in England and Wales but require support from general services for patient after-care.

Aims To compare outcomes following community after-care from forensic or general adult psychiatry services.

Method An observational comparison was made of case management following discharge from medium security in seven pre-reorganisation health regions of England and Wales, by forensic services (n=409) and general adult services (n=652). Criminal convictions, hospital readmissions and deaths were compared over a mean follow-up period of 6.2 years, adjusting for difference in case mix.

Results Forensic services did not supervise more high-risk patients in the community. Neither service was superior in outcome. More patients managed by general services died from natural causes.

Conclusions Neither service was superior on measures of subsequent offending or hospitalisation. Specialist forensic after-care conveyed no added benefit. Case management may have been the same in both services.


Related articles in BJP:

Highlights of this issue
KIMBERLIE DEAN
BJP 2007 190: a21. [Full Text]  



This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Br. J. PsychiatryHome page
P. Tyrer
From the Editor's desk
The British Journal of Psychiatry, July 1, 2008; 193(1): 90 - 90.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 The PsychiatristHome page
T. Turner and M. Salter
Forensic psychiatry and general psychiatry: re-examining the relationship
The Psychiatrist, January 1, 2008; 32(1): 2 - 6.
[Full Text] [PDF]