Search PubMedSearch

PubMed · 40819240

Predictive Validity of Violence Screening Tools in Emergency and Psychiatric Services: A Systematic Review.

Abstract

Violence against healthcare staff, including a threat or an act of violence toward people during their work, poses a physical and psychological risk to workers internationally. Screening is an important strategy in preventing violence against healthcare professionals. The aim of this systematic review was to synthesize evidence on the predictive validity of risk assessment tools used to screen for violence and aggression risk toward healthcare workers in emergency and psychiatric departments (PD). Primary studies that examined the predictive validity of risk assessment tools for workplace violence were identified via a systematic search of Medline, PsycINFO, Embase, and the Cochrane databases. There were 62 eligible studies, ten of which had a lower risk of bias (RoB). Those studies with high RoB were primarily due to a failure to present calibration measures as part of the analysis. All included studies adopted a longitudinal design and were conducted in PDs. The ten highest-quality studies reported on eight different instruments, four of which showed acceptable to outstanding predictive performance. The Dynamic Appraisal of Situational Aggression and the Brøset Violence Checklist showed the best predictive performance; they were also validated in emergency departments and are best suited for short-term risk prediction. We recommend that the selection of a risk assessment tool should consider the following: (a) the target population, (b) the violence operationalization, and (c) the purpose of the monitoring. We note that the use of a screening tool should be a part of a multicomponent strategy to ensure staff safety.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Sviatlana Kamarova, Simon R E Davidson, Christopher M Williams, Mariana Leite, Steven J Kamper. 2025-08-17. Predictive Validity of Violence Screening Tools in Emergency and Psychiatric Services: A Systematic Review.. https://doi.org/10.1177/15248380251358224

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

Discover connections

Connections use source metadata and explicit phrase matches, not verified experimental comparisons.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Workplace Safety Champions: Strengthening safety culture through nurse engagement.

Workplace violence is a growing concern in health care, disproportionately affecting frontline nurses and nursing assistants. Despite high prevalence, underreporting remains a barrier to effective prevention and response. This article describes the development, implementation, and outcomes of a Workplace Safety Champion program designed to increase reporting of violent incidents and strengthen a culture of safety. A multidisciplinary task force developed an evidence-based Workplace Safety Champion course that emphasizes de-escalation strategies, reporting processes, and staff support. Champions were appointed across inpatient and emergency units and integrated into a hospital-wide Workplace Safety Champion Council. Program evaluation used course completion data and posttraining surveys. The organizational goal of having at least one trained champion in 90% of inpatient and emergency units was exceeded, with 98% of units represented (N = 93 champions). More than 85% of learners reported intent to change their response to workplace violence, and 90% endorsed improved knowledge of resources and de-escalation strategies. The Workplace Safety Champion program successfully improved staff awareness, reporting, and engagement in workplace violence prevention. Embedding champions across units can serve as a sustainable strategy to strengthen safety culture and support frontline health care workers.

Humans

"Abrazos, no Balazos": Intensity of Risk for Exposure to Violence and Armed Conflict Trajectories for Adolescents and Young Adults in México 2018-2024.

PURPOSE: "Abrazos, no balazos" (Hugs, not gunshots) is the approach to violence used by the Federal Mexican government from 2018 to 2024. This study identifies distinct conceptually useful latent class growth trajectories in the annual intensity of risk for exposure to events and fatalities from violence against civilians and battles for adolescents and young adults (AYAs) in México from 2018 to 2024. METHODS: Data are from the Armed Conflict Location and Event Data project. Latent class growth analyses were conducted with four longitudinal dependent variables assessed in seven sequential years (2018-2024). RESULTS: In most of the Mexican states, AYAs experienced low intensity-flat trajectories (p >.096) in the annual intensity of risk for exposure to events and fatalities from violence against civilians and battles. AYAs who lived in states with extremely, markedly, or moderately elevated 2018 intensities of risk for exposure to violence experienced decreasing trajectories (p =.000). One latent class with a mildly elevated-increasing trajectory (p =.000) in the annual intensity of risk for exposure to violence was identified for each of the four longitudinal dependent variables. DISCUSSION: During the time that the Federal Mexican government used the "Abrazos, no balazos" approach, AYAs in the majority of the states in México had intensity of risk for exposure to violence and armed conflict trajectories that were consistent with the goals of primary and secondary violence prevention. Violence prevention efforts should be augmented in states with unfavorable trajectories.

Humans

Quantitative Outcomes for Shared Assessment and Management in Forensic Mental Health: A Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review.

Despite leading models of mental health care encouraging user involvement, users in forensic mental health (FMH) report poor involvement given the difficulty in reconciling shared approaches with risk-averse and legally mandated settings. While previous research has demonstrated qualitative benefits to shared approaches in FMH and has led to a proliferation of self-rated assessment tools, there remains to quantify agreement on self-rated tools and to clarify the impact of shared approaches on care. This meta-analysis examines (1) the correlation between clinician and user ratings, (2) the predictive validity of self-ratings for violence, and (3) the effects of shared risk management on violence and restriction in FMH. Five databases were searched from inception to April 2024, selecting for adult FMH inpatients, shared risk assessment, needs assessment or violence management as interventions, and quantitative outcomes (correlation, agreement, predictive validity, and effect on violence or restriction rates). Fifteen quantitative evaluations were retained. One of three planned meta-analyses could be conducted, with seven records providing paired clinician-user t-tests. Eleven more records provided clinical recommendations on operationalizing shared approaches. Random-effects meta-analysis showed a significant and large paired standard difference of .95 (95% CI = [.49,1.42]) across tools, with significant differences in DUNDRUM-3, DUNDRUM-4, and CANFOR sub-models. While acknowledging between-study heterogeneity, results substantiate quantitative differences where clinicians generally rate more needs and lesser progress than users across tools, showing that self-ratings can and should be used to broach collaborative discussions on needs and progress during FMH treatment. There remains an evidence gap for quantitative benefits in care outcomes and a need to standardize agreement measures for future comparisons and clinical sub-group analyses.

Humans