Copyright
©The Author(s) 2015.
World J Psychiatr. Jun 22, 2015; 5(2): 234-242
Published online Jun 22, 2015. doi: 10.5498/wjp.v5.i2.234
Published online Jun 22, 2015. doi: 10.5498/wjp.v5.i2.234
Facility questionnaire | Case questionnaire |
Facility organizer | Article number |
Number of beds | Gender1 |
Psychiatric beds | Age1 |
Other types of beds | Family members |
Number of staffs | Marital history |
Psychiatrists | Occupational history |
Psychiatric nurses | Therapeutic history |
Occupational therapists | Issued offense1 |
Psychiatric social workers | The victim |
Psychotherapists | The owner of the damaged property (if applicable) |
Public health nurses | Psychiatric testimonies1 |
Number of the accepted HfA cases1 | Preceding Decision by the prosecutor or the court1 |
Psychiatric diagnosis1 | |
Dual diagnosis (if applicable) | |
Physical complications (if applicable) | |
Treatment during HfA | |
Medication | |
Psychotropic drug injections1 | |
Long-acting injections1 | |
Electro-convulsive therapy1 | |
Seclusion and restraint1 | |
Belonging of the examiner psychiatrist1 | |
Verdict of the District Court panel1 |
Item | Options | n |
Organization | National, prefectural, or semi-official | 46 |
Private sector | 88 | |
Number of beds1 | Psychiatric beds | 284 ± 136 |
Other types of beds | Equipped | 27 |
Unequipped | 107 | |
Number of staffs1 | Psychiatrist | 10.4 ± 5.9 |
Designated Physician | 7.4 ± 3.9 | |
Judgment Physician | 1.9 ± 2.0 | |
Psychiatric nurse | 113.1 ± 51.3 | |
Occupational therapist | 8.0 ± 5.1 | |
Psychiatric social worker | 8.3 ± 5.5 | |
Candidate of Mental Health Advisor | 0.6 ± 1.0 | |
Psychotherapist | 3.8 ± 3.2 | |
Experience of accepting HfA case | Yes | 69 |
No | 64 | |
Unknown | 1 |
Year | 2007 | 2013 | P value | |
n | 284 | 171 | ||
Gender | Male | 196 | 123 | 0.981 |
Female | 76 | 48 | ||
Mean age | 43.2 ± 13.9 | 46.6 ± 16.4 | 0.0272 | |
Psychiatric testimony | No | 223 | 112 | 0.0041 |
Yes | 61 | 59 | ||
Psychiatric diagnosis | F0 | 17 | 18 | NA |
(ICD-10) | F1 | 15 | 13 | |
F2 | 204 | 111 | ||
F3 | 29 | 14 | ||
F4 | 4 | 1 | ||
F5 | 1 | 0 | ||
F6 | 3 | 2 | ||
F7 | 10 | 9 | ||
F8 | 1 | 2 | ||
F9 | 0 | 0 | ||
Injection | No | 251 | 166 | 0.0061 |
Yes | 33 | 5 | ||
Depot | No | 278 | 170 | 0.263 |
Yes | 6 | 1 | ||
Electroconvulsive therapy | No | 282 | 171 | 0.533 |
Yes | 2 | 0 | ||
Seclusion | No | 57 | 32 | 0.81 |
Yes | 194 | 116 | ||
mean term (d) | 37.1 ± 26.5 | 32.2 ± 27.1 | 0.122 | |
Restraint | No | 269 | 148 | 0.831 |
Yes | 15 | 10 | ||
Examiner Psychiatrist belongs to the hospital where the patient was hospitalized | No | 59 | 20 | 0.0021 |
Yes | 221 | 142 | ||
Verdict | Hospitalization | 137 | 120 | < 0.0011 |
Community treatment | 57 | 12 | ||
No-treatment | 44 | 57 | ||
Rejected or withdrawn | 7 | 6 |
- Citation: Shiina A, Iyo M, Hirata T, Igarashi Y. Audit study of the new hospitalization for assessment scheme for forensic mental health in Japan. World J Psychiatr 2015; 5(2): 234-242
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/2220-3206/full/v5/i2/234.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.5498/wjp.v5.i2.234