This study explores variables that predict physical violence in 614 (forensic) psychiatric inpatients. All violent incidents that occurred in a Dutch forensic psychiatric hospital between 2014 and 2019 ( N = 3,713) were coded with the Modified Overt Aggression Scale+ based on daily hospital reports and patients’ medical records. Binary logistic regression analyses examined which patient variables could differentiate between patients with and without physical violence during treatment and between patients with single and multiple incidents of physical violence. Variables included in the analyses were gender, legal status, borderline personality disorder, antisocial personality disorder, schizophrenia spectrum disorder, psychopathy (Psychopathy Checklist–Revised [PCL-R] score), self-harm during treatment, impulsivity, intellectual disability, and length of stay. A clear association was found between self-harm and inpatient physical violence on all outcome measures and in all analyses. Adequate monitoring of self-harm is advised as a strategy to early identify patients with a high risk to threaten ward safety.

Aggressive incidents occur frequently in health care facilities, such as psychiatric care and forensic psychiatric hospitals. Previous research suggests that civil psychiatric inpatients may display more aggression than forensic inpatients. However, there is a lack of research comparing these groups on the incident severity, even though both frequency and severity of aggression influence the impact on staff members. The purpose of this study is to compare the frequency and severity of inpatient aggression caused by forensic and civil psychiatric inpatients in the same Dutch forensic psychiatric hospital. Data on aggressive incidents occurring between January 1, 2014, and December 31, 2017, were gathered from hospital files and analyzed using the Modified Overt Aggression Scale, including sexual aggression (MOAS+). Multilevel random intercept models were used to analyze differences between forensic and civil psychiatric patients in severity of aggressive incidents. In all, 3,603 aggressive incidents were recorded, caused by 344 different patients. Civil psychiatric patients caused more aggressive incidents than forensic patients and female patients caused more inpatient aggression compared with male patients. Female forensic patients were found to cause the most severe incidents, followed by female civil psychiatric patients. Male forensic patients caused

Purpose -Inpatient violence can have a major impact in terms of traumatic experiences for victims and witnesses, an unsafe treatment climate, and high-financial costs. Therefore, the purpose of this paper is to gain more insight into patterns of violent behavior, so that adequate preventive measures can be taken. Design/methodology/approach -Data on inpatient violence in a Dutch forensic psychiatric hospital between 2008 and 2014 were extracted from hospital files on 503 patients. Findings -More than half of all the patients (n ¼ 276, 54.9 percent) displayed verbal aggression on at least one occasion, whereas 27.2 percent of all patients (n ¼ 137) exhibited one or more incidents of physical violence. Female patients were responsible for more physically violent episodes than male patients. Patients admitted with a civil court order exhibited more violent behavior than patients with a criminal court order. Violent patients with a civil commitment had a significantly longer length of stay than non-violent patients with a civil commitment. More violence was found to take place on the earlier days of the week. Originality/value -This study points at important differences between groups of forensic inpatients in frequency and type of inpatient violent behavior and in temporal factors. Interventions aimed at reducing the number of violent incidents should take these differences into account. Further research is necessary to gain more insight into the background of inpatient violence.

Forensic psychiatric inpatients are frequently exposed to aggression from fellow patients during their treatment, but research on how this impacts patients' well-being and treatment progress is lacking. In this study, we interviewed nine patients on their experiences of victimization during mandatory psychiatric treatment. The interviews were analyzed using a Grounded Theory approach combined with elements from Consensual Qualitative Research and Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis. Three main themes emerged from the data, namely situational descriptives, intrapersonal and interpersonal consequences. Patients were not only exposed to both physical violence and verbal aggression by other patients, but also to a more ubiquitous flow of micro-aggressive comments. Options to escape these situations were limited. This means that victimization processes, which for most patients started much earlier in life, continue during forensic psychiatric treatment. Intrapersonal consequences include fear, hypervigilance, reactive aggression, flashbacks and avoidance and withdrawal. Interpersonal consequences include increased power differences between patients and adverse treatment consequences, such as difficulties with self-esteem. Victimization processes are not always timely noticed in an environment that focuses on risks and treatment of delinquent behavior. A higher level of trauma sensitivity in forensic mental health care is thus required. Recommendations for the implementation of trauma informed care are provided.

Purpose Incidents of self-injury by forensic psychiatric patients often have a deleterious impact on all those involved. Moreover, self-injurious behaviour is an important predictor for violence towards others during treatment. The aim of this study is to analyse methods and severity of incidents of self-injury of patients admitted to forensic psychiatry, as well as the diagnoses of self-injuring patients. Design/methodology/approach All incidents of self-injury during treatment in a forensic psychiatric centre recorded between 2008 and 2019 were analysed and the severity was coded with the modified observed aggression scale+ (MOAS+). Findings In this period, 299 incidents of self-injury were recorded, displayed by 106 patients. Most of these incidents (87.6%) were classified as non-suicidal. Methods most often used were skin cutting with glass, broken plates, a razor or knife and swallowing dangerous objects or liquids. Ten patients died by suicide, almost all by suffocation with a rope or belt. The majority of the incidents was coded as severe or extreme with the MOAS+. Female patients were overrepresented and they caused on average three times more incidents than male patients. Practical implications More attention is warranted for self-injurious behaviour during forensic treatment considering the distressing consequences for both patients themselves, supervisors and witnesses. Adequate screening for risk of self-injurious behaviour could help to prevent this behaviour. Further research is needed in different forensic settings into predictors of self-injurious behaviour, more specifically, if there are distinct predictors for aggression to others versus to the self. Originality/value Incidents of self-injury occur with some regularity in forensic mental health care and are usually classified as severe. The impact of suicide (attempts) and incidents of self-injurious behaviour on all those involved can be enormous. More research is needed into the impact on all those involved, motivations, precipitants and functions of self-injurious behaviour and effective treatment of it.