Search

Background Violence is a common problem in prisons. Post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), a prevalent disorder in prison populations, has been identified as a risk factor for violent behaviour in community and military populations. Although cross-sectional associations between PTSD and prison violence have been documented, prospective cohort studies are required. Aims To investigate whether PTSD is an independent risk factor for prison violence, and examine the potential role of PTSD symptoms and other trauma sequelae on the pathway from trauma exposure to violent behaviour in prison. Method A prospective cohort study was conducted in a large, medium security prison in London, UK. A random sample of sentenced prisoners arriving into custody (N = 223) took part in a clinical research interview, which assessed trauma histories, mental disorders including PTSD, and other potential sequelae of trauma (anger, emotion dysregulation). Incidents of violent behaviour were measured with prison records covering the 3 months after reception into custody. Stepped binary logistic regression and a series of binary mediation models were performed. Results Prisoners who met current (past month) criteria for PTSD were more likely to engage in violent behaviour during the first 3 months of imprisonment, after adjusting for other independent risk factors. The relationship between lifetime exposure to interpersonal trauma and violent behaviour in custody was mediated by total PTSD symptom severity. Hyperarousal and negatively valenced cognitive and emotional appraisal symptoms were particularly implicated in this pathway. Conclusions The identification and treatment of PTSD has the potential to reduce violence in prison populations.

BackgroundThere is growing risk from terrorism following radicalisation of young men. It is unclear whether psychopathology is associated.AimsTo investigate the population distribution of extremist views among UK men.MethodCross-sectional study of 3679 men, 18–34 years, in Great Britain. Multivariate analyses of attitudes, psychiatric morbidity, ethnicity and religion.ResultsPro-British men were more likely to be White, UK born, not religious; anti-British were Muslim, religious, of Pakistani origin, from deprived areas. Pro- and anti-British views were linearly associated with violence (adjusted odds ratio (OR) = 1.51, 95% CI 1.38–1.64,PPPP= 0.003, respectively).ConclusionsMen at risk of depression may experience protection from strong cultural or religious identity. Antisocial behaviour increases with extremism. Religion is protective but may determine targets of violence following radicalisation.

BackgroundLittle is known about the prevalence of mental health outcomes in UK personnel at the end of the British involvement in the Iraq and Afghanistan conflicts.AimsWe examined the prevalence of mental disorders and alcohol misuse, whether this differed between serving and ex-serving regular personnel and by deployment status.MethodThis is the third phase of a military cohort study (2014–2016; n = 8093). The sample was based on participants from previous phases (2004–2006 and 2007–2009) and a new randomly selected sample of those who had joined the UK armed forces since 2009.ResultsThe prevalence was 6.2% for probable post-traumatic stress disorder, 21.9% for common mental disorders and 10.0% for alcohol misuse. Deployment to Iraq or Afghanistan and a combat role during deployment were associated with significantly worse mental health outcomes and alcohol misuse in ex-serving regular personnel but not in currently serving regular personnel.ConclusionsThe findings highlight an increasing prevalence of post-traumatic stress disorder and a lowering prevalence of alcohol misuse compared with our previous findings and stresses the importance of continued surveillance during service and beyond.Declaration of interest:All authors are based at King's College London which, for the purpose of this study and other military-related studies, receives funding from the UK Ministry of Defence (MoD). S.A.M.S., M.J., L.H., D.P., S.M. and R.J.R. salaries were totally or partially paid by the UK MoD. The UK MoD provides support to the Academic Department of Military Mental Health, and the salaries of N.J., N.G. and N.T.F. are covered totally or partly by this contribution. D.Mu. is employed by Combat Stress, a national UK charity that provides clinical mental health services to veterans. D.MacM. is the lead consultant for an NHS Veteran Mental Health Service. N.G. is the Royal College of Psychiatrists’ Lead for Military and Veterans’ Health, a trustee of Walking with the Wounded, and an independent director at the Forces in Mind Trust; however, he was not directed by these organisations in any way in relation to his contribution to this paper. N.J. is a full-time member of the armed forces seconded to King's College London. N.T.F. reports grants from the US Department of Defense and the UK MoD, is a trustee (unpaid) of The Warrior Programme and an independent advisor to the Independent Group Advising on the Release of Data (IGARD). S.W. is a trustee (unpaid) of Combat Stress and Honorary Civilian Consultant Advisor in Psychiatry for the British Army (unpaid). S.W. is affiliated to the National Institute for Health Research Health Protection Research Unit (NIHR HPRU) in Emergency Preparedness and Response at King's College London in partnership with Public Health England, in collaboration with the University of East Anglia and Newcastle University. The views expressed are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the National Health Service, the NIHR, the Department of Health, Public Health England or the UK MoD.