Support for the predictive validity of the multifactor offender readiness model (MORM) : forensic patients' readiness and engagement with therapeutic groups

BACKGROUND: Treatment non-engagement in forensic health settings has ethical and economic implications. The multifactor offender readiness model (MORM) provides a framework for assessing treatment readiness across person, programme and contexts. AIMS: To answer the following question: Are the internal factors of the MORM associated with likelihood of engagement in groups by patients in forensic mental health services? METHOD: In a retrospective design, associations were investigated between internal factors of the MORM, measured as part of assessment for group participation, and the outcomes of treatment refusal, treatment dropout and treatment completion. RESULTS: One hundred and eighteen male patients in a high security hospital consecutively referred for group treatment agreed to participate. Internal factors of the MORM associated with treatment refusals included: psychopathic cognition, negative self-evaluation/affect and effective goal-seeking strategies. Those associated with dropouts included emotional dysregulation, low competencies to engage and low levels of general distress. MORM factors associated with completion included: low motivation, ineffective goal-seeking strategies, absence of psychopathic cognition, high levels of general distress and competency to engage. CONCLUSIONS: Internal factors of the MORM could be useful contributors to decisions about treatment readiness for hospitalised male offender-patients. Up to one in three programmes offered were refused, so clinical use of the MORM to aid referral decisions could optimise the most constructive use of resources for every individual

A psychometric evaluation of the Defence Style Questionnaire-40 in a UK forensic patient population

Psychological defence mechanisms have been considered important personality processes in the onset, maintenance and recovery of mental disorders. More recently, their application to understanding presenting problems and as potential outcome indicators for forensic patients has been recommended. However, to date there have been no investigations into the reliability and factor structure of defence mechanism assessments for this population. The current study investigated the factor structure, internal consistency and test-retest reliability of the Defence Style Questionnaire-40 (DSQ) for 160 adult male UK forensic patients. The three-factor model of defences proposed by the DSQ-40 developers was not confirmed in the study sample. Reliability indices of the three factors indicated that the Immature factor was the most ‘acceptable’ in terms of internal consistency. Test-retest reliability coefficients ranged from .70 to .91. A revised three-factor structure that closely corresponds to the original validation study is recommended following an exploratory factor analysis. The findings are compared with previous reliability and factor analytic evaluations of the DSQ-40, and recommendations for its use with forensic patients are discussed

The Grizzly, March 24, 1992

Sororities Honored for Participation in Blood Drive • Economist Speaks on Recession • Sailing on the Chesapeake • U.S.G.A. Minutes • Consider Women\u27s Studies Next Semester • Senior Class: Please Give • Fraternity Pledging Ends • Admitted Students Reception • Precipitation Indication • Maquette Exhibit • Movie Review: Hot Shots • New Sculpture Exhibit to Open • Movie Review: My Cousin Vinny • CAB Performers Humor and Hypnotize • Touchstone Ensemble\u27s Interpretation of Candide • Stop Complaining; Start Conserving • Letters: More Responses to Airband Controversy • (Sic)\u27em: A Concern Over Grizzly Policy • Men and Women Swimmers End Season • Derstine, Cauley at Nationals • Freshman Power and the Liberty Bell • Gymnasts Finish Seasonhttps://digitalcommons.ursinus.edu/grizzlynews/1293/thumbnail.jp

Determination of HIV status and identification of incident HIV infections in a large, community-randomized trial: HPTN 071 (PopART).

INTRODUCTION: The HPTN 071 (PopART) trial evaluated the impact of an HIV combination prevention package that included "universal testing and treatment" on HIV incidence in 21 communities in Zambia and South Africa during 2013-2018. The primary study endpoint was based on the results of laboratory-based HIV testing for> 48,000 participants who were followed for up to three years. This report evaluated the performance of HIV assays and algorithms used to determine HIV status and identify incident HIV infections in HPTN 071, and assessed the impact of errors on HIV incidence estimates. METHODS: HIV status was determined using a streamlined, algorithmic approach. A single HIV screening test was performed at centralized laboratories in Zambia and South Africa (all participants, all visits). Additional testing was performed at the HPTN Laboratory Center using antigen/antibody screening tests, a discriminatory test and an HIV RNA test. This testing was performed to investigate cases with discordant test results and confirm incident HIV infections. RESULTS: HIV testing identified 978 seroconverter cases. This included 28 cases where the participant had acute HIV infection at the first HIV-positive visit. Investigations of cases with discordant test results identified cases where there was a participant or sample error (mixups). Seroreverter cases (errors where status changed from HIV infected to HIV uninfected, 0.4% of all cases) were excluded from the primary endpoint analysis. Statistical analysis demonstrated that exclusion of those cases improved the accuracy of HIV incidence estimates. CONCLUSIONS: This report demonstrates that the streamlined, algorithmic approach effectively identified HIV infections in this large cluster-randomized trial. Longitudinal HIV testing (all participants, all visits) and quality control testing provided useful data on the frequency of errors and provided more accurate data for HIV incidence estimates

At-risk registers integrated into primary care to stop asthma crises in the UK (ARRISA-UK): study protocol for a pragmatic, cluster randomised trial with nested health economic and process evaluations

Background: Despite effective treatments and long-standing management guidelines, there are approximately 1400 hospital admissions for asthma weekly in the United Kingdom (UK), many of which could be avoided. In our previous research, a secondary analysis of the intervention (ARRISA) suggested an improvement in the management of at-risk asthma patients in primary care. ARRISA involved identifying individuals at risk of adverse asthma events, flagging their electronic health records, training practice staff to develop and implement practice-wide processes of care when alerted by the flag, plus motivational reminders. We now seek to determine the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of ARRISA in reducing asthma-related crisis events. Methods: We are undertaking a pragmatic, two-arm, multicentre, cluster randomised controlled trial, plus health economic and process evaluation. We will randomise 270 primary care practices from throughout the UK covering over 10,000 registered patients with ‘at-risk asthma’ identified according to a validated algorithm. Staff in practices randomised to the intervention will complete two 45-min eLearning modules (an individually completed module giving background to ARRISA and a group-completed module to develop practice-wide pathways of care) plus a 30-min webinar with other practices. On completion of training at-risk patients’ records will be coded so that a flag appears whenever their record is accessed. Practices will receive a phone call at 4 weeks and a reminder video at 6 weeks and 6 months. Control practices will continue to provide usual care. We will extract anonymised routine patient data from primary care records (with linkage to secondary care data) to determine the percentage of at-risk patients with an asthma-related crisis event (accident and emergency attendances, hospitalisations and deaths) after 12 months (primary outcome). We will also capture the time to crisis event, all-cause hospitalisations, asthma control and any changes in practice asthma management for at-risk and all patients with asthma. Cost-effectiveness analysis and mixed-methods process evaluations will also be conducted. Discussion: This study is novel in terms of using a practice-wide intervention to target and engage with patients at risk from their asthma and is innovative in the use of routinely captured data with record linkage to obtain trial outcomes. Trial registration: ISRCTN95472706. Registered on 5 December 2014

Effect of Universal Testing and Treatment on HIV Incidence - HPTN 071 (PopART).

BACKGROUND: A universal testing and treatment strategy is a potential approach to reduce the incidence of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection, yet previous trial results are inconsistent. METHODS: In the HPTN 071 (PopART) community-randomized trial conducted from 2013 through 2018, we randomly assigned 21 communities in Zambia and South Africa (total population, approximately 1 million) to group A (combination prevention intervention with universal antiretroviral therapy [ART]), group B (the prevention intervention with ART provided according to local guidelines [universal since 2016]), or group C (standard care). The prevention intervention included home-based HIV testing delivered by community workers, who also supported linkage to HIV care and ART adherence. The primary outcome, HIV incidence between months 12 and 36, was measured in a population cohort of approximately 2000 randomly sampled adults (18 to 44 years of age) per community. Viral suppression (<400 copies of HIV RNA per milliliter) was assessed in all HIV-positive participants at 24 months. RESULTS: The population cohort included 48,301 participants. Baseline HIV prevalence was 21% or 22% in each group. Between months 12 and 36, a total of 553 new HIV infections were observed during 39,702 person-years (1.4 per 100 person-years; women, 1.7; men, 0.8). The adjusted rate ratio for group A as compared with group C was 0.93 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.74 to 1.18; P = 0.51) and for group B as compared with group C was 0.70 (95% CI, 0.55 to 0.88; P = 0.006). The percentage of HIV-positive participants with viral suppression at 24 months was 71.9% in group A, 67.5% in group B, and 60.2% in group C. The estimated percentage of HIV-positive adults in the community who were receiving ART at 36 months was 81% in group A and 80% in group B. CONCLUSIONS: A combination prevention intervention with ART provided according to local guidelines resulted in a 30% lower incidence of HIV infection than standard care. The lack of effect with universal ART was unanticipated and not consistent with the data on viral suppression. In this trial setting, universal testing and treatment reduced the population-level incidence of HIV infection. (Funded by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and others; HPTN 071 [PopArt] ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01900977.)

Evaluation of multi-assay algorithms for identifying individuals with recent HIV infection: HPTN 071 (PopART)

BACKGROUND: Assays and multi-assay algorithms (MAAs) have been developed for population-level cross-sectional HIV incidence estimation. These algorithms use a combination of serologic and/or non-serologic biomarkers to assess the duration of infection. We evaluated the performance of four MAAs for individual-level recency assessments. METHODS: Samples were obtained from 220 seroconverters (infected 1 year) enrolled in an HIV prevention trial (HPTN 071 [PopART]); 28.6% of the seroconverters and 73.4% of the non-seroconverters had HIV viral loads ≤400 copies/mL. Samples were tested with two laboratory-based assays (LAg-Avidity, JHU BioRad-Avidity) and a point-of-care assay (rapid LAg). The four MAAs included different combinations of these assays and HIV viral load. Seroconverters on antiretroviral treatment (ART) were identified using a qualitative multi-drug assay. RESULTS: The MAAs identified between 54 and 100 (25% to 46%) of the seroconverters as recently-infected. The false recent rate of the MAAs for infections >2 years duration ranged from 0.2%-1.3%. The MAAs classified different overlapping groups of individuals as recent vs. non-recent. Only 32 (15%) of the 220 seroconverters were classified as recent by all four MAAs. Viral suppression impacted the performance of the two LAg-based assays. LAg-Avidity assay values were also lower for seroconverters who were virally suppressed on ART compared to those with natural viral suppression. CONCLUSIONS: The four MAAs evaluated varied in sensitivity and specificity for identifying persons infected <1 year as recently infected and classified different groups of seroconverters as recently infected. Sensitivity was low for all four MAAs. These performance issues should be considered if these methods are used for individual-level recency assessments