Search

Psychiatric morbidity is high in the prison population and prisoners with mental health problems present with complex needs. Working within the stressful prison environment and exposure to traumatic events may make prison mental health staff and correctional officers vulnerable to burnout, compassion fatigue, and reduced compassion satisfaction. This issue has not previously been explored in the prison setting. In this exploratory study, 36 mental health professionals and correctional officers were recruited from a prison in England and completed a series of questionnaires on their demographic and professional characteristics, exposure to traumatic events, support from managers and colleagues and on levels of burnout, compassion fatigue, and compassion satisfaction. Staff had high levels of exposure to traumatic events and the level of support provided by managers and colleagues was mixed. The majority of staff were not at high risk of burnout, compassion fatigue and reduced compassion satisfaction but higher levels of burnout, compassion fatigue and reduced compassion satisfaction were found to be associated with a range of factors including staff characteristics, exposure to traumatic events, and working environment. These findings should be interpreted with the small sample size and limited power in mind and larger surveys of staff working in prison mental health settings are needed to confirm these results across a wider number of sites but nonetheless this study highlights the need for providers to consider staff's exposure to traumatic events and to promote supportive working environments.

Background: Around 25% of prisoners meet diagnostic criteria for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Because ADHD is associated with increased recidivism and other functional and behavioural problems, appropriate diagnosis and treatment can be a critical intervention to improve outcomes. While ADHD is a treatable condition, best managed by a combination of medication and psychological treatments, among individuals in the criminal justice system ADHD remains both mis- and under-diagnosed and consequently inadequately treated. We aimed to identify barriers within the prison system that prevent appropriate intervention, and provide a practical approach to identify and treat incarcerated offenders with ADHD., Methods: The United Kingdom ADHD Partnership hosted a consensus meeting to discuss practical interventions for youth (< 18 years) and adult (≥18 years) offenders with ADHD. Experts at the meeting addressed prisoners' needs for effective identification, treatment, and multiagency liaison, and considered the requirement of different approaches based on age or gender., Results: The authors developed a consensus statement that offers practical advice to anyone working with prison populations. We identified specific barriers within the prison and criminal justice system such as the lack of adequate: staff and offender awareness of ADHD symptoms and treatments; trained mental health staff; use of appropriate screening and diagnostic tools; appropriate multimodal interventions; care management; supportive services; multiagency liaison; and preparation for prison release. Through discussion, a consensus was reached regarding prisoners' needs, effective identification, treatment and multiagency liaison and considered how this may differ for age and gender., Conclusions: This practical approach based upon expert consensus will inform effective identification and treatment of offenders with ADHD. Appropriate intervention is expected to have a positive impact on the offender and society and lead to increased productivity, decreased resource utilization, and most importantly reduced rates of re-offending. Research is still needed, however, to identify optimal clinical operating models and to monitor their implementation and measure their success. Furthermore, government support will likely be required to effect change in criminal justice and mental health service policies.

There is a high prevalence of mental health need in prisons, much of which is currently unmet. Although considerable research has identified and described this mental health need, there has been limited research focussed on reviewing the delivery of mental health care in prisons. This study uses content analysis to review 36 unannounced prison inspection reports in England to establish whether mental health care was provided to an appropriate standard, and whether it is equivalent to services that are provided in the wider community. The analysis identified four main categories, each of which had further sub-categories: managing the process; staffing; range of services; and quality of service. Numerous concerns were identified, including: delays to service access; lack of appropriate interventions; low staffing levels; limited specialist support; and limited access to supervision, training and reflective practice. Despite these difficulties, many teams had adopted open referral systems to improve service access, had good working relationships and were thought to be providing care of good quality. The delivery of mental health care within prisons is still not equivalent to that which is provided in the community, and this study has identified a number of areas for further improvement., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: The prison population in England and Wales is approximately 85,000, and elevated rates of mental health difficulties have been reported among the prisoners. Despite frequent recommendations for family interventions to optimise prisoner outcomes, the evidence for its use and impact in prison remain unclear., Aim: The aim of the study is to conduct a systematic review of published literature on family interventions in prisons., Methods: Embase, PsychINFO and Medline were searched using terms for family interventions and for prisoners or young offenders. No limit was imposed on study design, but, for inclusion, we required that papers were written in English and published in peer-reviewed journals., Results: Nine hundred eighty-three titles were retrieved. Twenty-two met criteria for inclusion. Three were case studies, 12 were descriptive, 6 were quasi-experimental and one was a randomised controlled trial. Interventions and study methods were too heterogeneous for meta-analysis. All studies gave positive conclusions about family interventions, but empirical data on effectiveness were slight., Conclusions: Consistency in findings across the wide-ranging studies suggested that family therapies may indeed be helpful for prisoners and their families, so further research is warranted. The fact that a randomised controlled trial proved feasible should encourage researchers to seek more robust data and to determine which form of intervention is effective and in which circumstances. It would also be useful to develop an improved understanding of mechanisms of change. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., (Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.)

Purpose: This study aimed to describe the workings of an urban male remand prison mental health service exploring the key challenges and successes, levels of integration and collaboration with other services., Method: A purposive sampling was used to recruit key prison and healthcare professionals for in-depth interviews. A thematic analysis was used to analyse transcripts based on an initial coding frame of several predefined themes. Other key themes were also identified., Results: Twenty-eight interviews were conducted. Prisoners referred to the service had complex, sometimes acute mental illness requiring specialist assessment and treatment. Key successes of the in-reach service included the introduction of an open referral system, locating a mental health nurse at reception to screen all new prisoners and a zoning system to prioritise urgent or non-urgent cases. Achieving an integrated system of healthcare was challenging because of the numerous internal and external services operating across the prison, a highly transient population, limited time and space to deliver services and difficulties with providing inpatient care (e.g., establishing the criteria for admission and managing patient flow). Collaborative working between prison and healthcare staff was required to enable best care for prisoners., Conclusions: The prison mental health in-reach service worked well in assessing and prioritising those who required specialist mental health care. Although the challenges of working within the prison context limited what the in-reach team could achieve. Further work was needed to improve the unit environment and how best to target and deliver inpatient care within the prison.

Purpose: Prison mental health in-reach teams (MHITs) have developed in England and Wales over the last decade. Services have been nationally reviewed, but detailed descriptions of their work have been scarce. The purpose of this paper is to describe the functions of one MHIT in a busy, ethnically diverse, male remand prison in London, UK., Design/methodology/approach: Clinical and demographic data were collected for prisoners referred to the MHIT using a retrospective design over an 18-week period in 2008/2009 (n=111)., Findings: Foreign national prisoners and sentenced prisoners were significantly under-referred. Most referrals were already known to community mental health services, although around a quarter accessed services for the first time in prison. Around a third presented with self-harm/suicide risks. Substance misuse problems were common. Although the MHIT had evolved systems to promote service access, prisoner self-referrals were limited., Practical Implications: Foreign national prisoners require enhanced investment to improve service access. MHITs identify people with mental disorders for the first time in prisons, but better screening arrangements are needed across systems. An evaluation of multiple MHIT models could inform a wider delivery template. Originality/value - One of the first ground-level evaluations of MHITs in England and Wales.

In responding to high levels of psychiatric morbidity amongst prisoners and recognising earlier poor quality prison mental health care, prison mental health in-reach teams have been established in England and Wales over the last decade. They are mostly provided by the National Health Service (NHS), which provides the majority of UK healthcare services. Over the same period, the prison population has grown to record levels, such that prisons in England and Wales now contain almost 90,000 of the world's overall prison population of over 10 million people (roughly the size of Paris or Istanbul). This study provides an overview of mental health in-reach services in prisons in England and Wales, including variations between them, through a telephone survey of senior staff in all prisons and young offender institutions in England and Wales. 73% of prisons took part; of them 13% had no in-reach team at all (usually low security establishments) and the majority of services were run by NHS teams, usually according to a generic community mental health team (CMHT) model rather than other specialist models. Team size was unrelated to prison size. Each nurse covered around 500 prisoners, each doctor over 3700. Many provided few or no healthcare cells and 24-h psychiatric cover (including on-call cover) was uncommon. Despite developments in recent years, mental health in-reach services still fall short of community equivalence and there is wide variation in service arrangements that cannot be explained by prison size or function. The aim of community equivalence has not yet been reached in prison healthcare and a more sophisticated measure of service improvement and standardisation would now be useful to drive and monitor future development., (Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

The concept of the "right to health," regardless of a person's legal status, is a guiding force in establishing adequate standards of health care for all, including prisoners with mental illness. Prison health care in the United States, however, often falls below acceptable minimum standards. In the United Kingdom, the notion of equivalence has been the main driving force in improving prison mental health care. Although improvements have been made over the past ten years, demand for services continues to outstrip supply, as in the U.S. prison system. In both prison systems, prisoners often present with complex and multiple needs, much greater than those found in community samples. Even mental health care equivalent to that provided in the community falls significantly short of what is required. Further improvements to prison health care, therefore, remain a priority, and a more suitable model needs to be established and implemented. The authors propose an assertive application of a person's right to health with a well-defined framework for health care that is available, accessible, acceptable, and of good quality (AAAQ). The authors explore how the AAAQ framework can move beyond minimal or equivalent standards to deal with complex prison structures, meet health care needs, and measure progress more effectively. The AAAQ framework could lead to more equitable standards of health care that can be applied to international settings.

Both Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder and Complex Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder are prevalent in prison settings. Both often go undetected and untreated, while prisoners who already suffered previous trauma may be re-traumatised upon imprisonment. The current study aimed to conduct a national survey of all Welsh prisons to gather information about existing services and treatments for traumatic stress. The survey identified variation within Welsh prisons with regard to NICE-recommended evidence-based therapies. It is therefore recommended that there needs to be development of a pathway of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder and Complex Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder in the prison system which should be achieved through a consensus process of both frontline staff and experts in the field. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Transfer to a psychiatric hospital of prisoners who need inpatient treatment for a mental disorder is an important part of prison healthcare in the UK. It is an essential factor in ensuring the principle of equivalence in the treatment of prisoners. In England and Wales, delays in transferring unwell prisoners to hospital were identified by the 2009 Bradley Report. There has been no subsequent systematic review of progress in so doing nor a corresponding appraisal of transfer arrangements in other parts of the world. Aim: To conduct a systematic review of international literature about transfers of mentally unwell individuals from prison to hospital for the treatment of mental disorder since 2009. Method: Eight databases were searched for data‐based publications using terms for prison and transfer to hospital from 1 January 2009 to 4 August 2022. Inclusion criteria limited transfer to arrangements for pre‐trial and sentenced prisoners going to a health service hospital, excluding hospital orders made on the conclusion of criminal hearing. Results: In England, four articles were identified, all showing that transfer times remain considerably longer than the national targets of 14 days (range, 14 days to >9 months); one study from Scotland found shorter mean transfer times, but more patients had been transferred to psychiatric intensive care units than to secure forensic hospitals. There were only two studies that investigated prison to hospital transfers for mental disorder from outside the UK and only one reported time‐to‐transfer data. Conclusions: Findings from this literature review highlight failures to resolve transfer delays in England and provide little evidence about the problem elsewhere. Given the lack of data, it is unclear whether other countries do not have this problem or simply that there has been no research interest in it. A possible confounding factor here is that, in some countries, all treatment for prisoners' mental disorders occurs in prison. However, the principle that prisons are not hospitals seems important when people need inpatient care. Prospective, longitudinal cohort studies are urgently needed to map transfer times and outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this narrative review we consider what is known about mental health conditions in the prison system in Bangladesh and describe the current provision of mental health services for prisoners with mental health needs. We contextualise this within the literature on mental health conditions in correctional settings in the wider sub-continental region and low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) more broadly. We augment findings from the literature with information from unstructured interviews with local experts, and offer recommendations for research, policy and practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The impact of Covid-19 makes provision of mental health care in prisons particularly challenging. The current impact on staff and prisoners is significant. Staff are under pressure to make ongoing adaptions to how they work and the interventions they are able to offer, whilst increased time spent in lock down and a reduction in services is having a negative effect on the mental health and wellbeing of prisoners. The potential for longer term deleterious consequences is also great given the currently high levels of psychological distress. Clinical psychologists could be invaluable in supporting staff and adaptations to services so support is maintained, but providing this increased level of support within an already stretched system is challenging, particularly given that prisons are predominantly staffed by forensic rather than clinical psychologists. The need for an adequate level of clinical psychology provision within prisons may never have been greater. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Telemedicine, or telehealth, has been with us for some time and has progressed particularly well in countries when doctor and patient may be separated by long distances. Feelings between patient and interviewer develop more quickly in a natural environment and the interviewer can test their own feelings, for example, does the patient create a sense of fear and threat. Likely limits on the development of a good working relationship arising from the barriers surrounding telehealth practices may encourage a view that the patient is an object presenting with a collection of signs and symptoms, rather than a human being. [Extracted from the article]

SummaryPrisons in England and Wales have reached a low point in service delivery. Despite initial improvements after National Health Service transfer in 2006, it has deteriorated since 2010, with numerous reports giving cause for concern. Improvements are now urgently required, and political courage and a revised national programme of expenditure are necessary.Declaration of interestNone. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In England and Wales, mental health in-reach teams manage high levels of mental disorder in prisons, but problems with reception screening and referral triage have been identified. As one potential solution, we examined the effect of an open referral pathway upon one in-reach team by evaluating its referrals and caseload across two time periods (in 2008 and 2011). There was a doubling of team referrals (from 101 to 203) with significantly improved identification of people with no mental health history. There was further evidence for a lowering of thresholds for referral and assessment, an approach that can be seen as helpful within a system that is known to under-identify mental health problems. Despite limitations, this evaluation offers some evidence for the effectiveness of open referral systems. It also raises questions about the potential effects of liaison and diversion services that are presently being piloted for national introduction. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]