Dataset Information

Results of the Brief Jail Mental Health Screen Across Repeated Jail Bookings.

ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVE:The Brief Jail Mental Health Screen (BJMHS) is widely used at intake in county jails to identify detainees who may have serious mental illness and who should be referred for further mental health evaluation. The BJMHS may be administered multiple times across repeated jail bookings; however, the extent to which results may change over time is unclear. To that end, the authors examined the odds of screening positive on the BJMHS across repeated jail bookings. METHODS:Data were drawn from the administrative and medical records of a large, urban county jail that used the BJMHS at jail booking. The study sample comprised BJMHS results for the 12,531 jail detainees who were booked at least twice during the 3.5-year period (N=41,965 bookings). Multilevel logistic modeling was used to examine changes over time overall and within the four decision rules (current psychiatric medication, prior hospitalization, two or more current symptoms, and referral for any other reason). RESULTS:Results show that the odds of a positive screen overall increased with each jail booking, as did the odds of referral for any other reason. In contrast, the odds of screening positive for two or more current symptoms and prior hospitalization decreased. There was no change in the odds of screening positive for current psychiatric medication across bookings. CONCLUSIONS:Findings show that BJMHS results changed across bookings. Further research is needed to determine whether changes reflect true changes in mental health status, issues with fidelity, the repeated nature of the screening process, or other factors.

SUBMITTER: Zottola SA

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6857168 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Results of the Brief Jail Mental Health Screen Across Repeated Jail Bookings.

Zottola Samantha A SA Desmarais Sarah L SL Neupert Shevaun D SD Dong Lin L Laber Eric E Lowder Evan M EM Van Dorn Richard A RA

Psychiatric services (Washington, D.C.) 20190805 11

<h4>Objective</h4>The Brief Jail Mental Health Screen (BJMHS) is widely used at intake in county jails to identify detainees who may have serious mental illness and who should be referred for further mental health evaluation. The BJMHS may be administered multiple times across repeated jail bookings; however, the extent to which results may change over time is unclear. To that end, the authors examined the odds of screening positive on the BJMHS across repeated jail bookings.<h4>Methods</h4>Data ...[more]

PMID: 31378191

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Integrating care for common mental disorders (CMDs) such as depression, anxiety and alcohol abuse into primary healthcare (PHC) should assist in reducing South Africa (SA)'s quadruple burden of disease. CMDs compromise treatment adherence, health behaviour change and self-management of illnesses. Appropriate identification of mental disorders in primary care can be facilitated by brief, easy-to-administer screening that promotes high specificity. OBJECTIVES:To establish the criterion-based validity of a seven-item Brief Mental Health (BMH) screening tool for assessing positive symptoms of CMDs in primary care patients. METHODS:A total of 1 214 participants were recruited from all patients aged ?18 years visiting 10 clinics as part of routine care in the Newcastle subdistrict of Amajuba District in KwaZulu-Natal Province, SA, over a period of 2 weeks. Consenting patients provided basic biographical information prior to screening with the BMH tool. PHC nurses remained blind to this assessment. PHC nurse-initiated assessment using the Adult Primary Care (APC) guidelines was the gold standard against which the performance of the BMH tool was compared. A specificity standard of 80% was used to establish cut-points. Specificity was favoured over sensitivity to ensure that those who did not have CMD symptoms were excluded, as well as to reduce over-referrals. RESULTS:Of the participants, 72% were female. The AUD-C (alcohol abuse) performed well (area under the curve (AUC) 0.91 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.88 - 0.95), cut-point ?4, Cronbach alpha 0.87); PHQ-2 (depression) performed reasonably well (AUC 0.72 (95% CI 0.65 - 0.78), cut-point ?3, alpha 0.71); and GAD-2 (anxiety) performance was acceptable (AUC 0.69 (95% CI 0.58 - 0.80), cut-point ?3, alpha 0.62). Using the higher cut-off scores, patients who truly did not have CMD symptoms had negative predictive values (NPVs) of >90%. Overall, 26% of patients had CMD positive symptoms relative to 8% using the APC guidelines. CONCLUSIONS:Using a higher specificity index, the positive predictive value and NPV show that at higher cut-point values the BMH not only helps identify individuals with alcohol misuse, depression and anxiety symptoms but also identifies a majority of those who do not have symptoms (true negatives), thus not overburdening nurses with false positives needing assessment. Research is needed to assess whether use of such a short and valid screening tool is generalisable to other clinic contexts as well as how mental health screening should best be introduced into routine clinic functioning and practice.

Project description:Several psychometrically sound measures of alcohol use have been developed to assess drinking. The Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT) and its shorter counterpart the AUDIT-C, which contains the first 3 AUDIT questions, were developed by the World Health Organization and have become the preferred brief measures for screening and evaluating problem severity. This study compared the first 3 questions on the AUDIT with another psychometrically sound brief measure of alcohol use, the Quick Drinking Screen (QDS).Data were obtained from a randomized controlled trial of a mail-based intervention promoting self-change with 472 alcohol abusers (n = 280, no prior alcohol treatment; n = 192, prior alcohol treatment). Participants' retrospective self-reports of alcohol consumption were collected using the QDS and the 3 AUDIT-C questions and compared. Although both measures contain similar questions (2 quantity-frequency and 1 binge drinking), they differ in 2 important ways: (i) temporal interval over which data are collected, and (ii) formatting of response options (i.e., a continuous number vs. categorical).Intraclass correlations for drinking variables were moderate to moderately high. A repeated-measures MANOVA using treatment condition and gender as variables revealed significant differences in absolute values between the 2 drinking measures with the QDS showing greater consumption on almost all variables. Participants' numerical answers on the QDS were compared to their categorical answers to the similar alcohol use questions on the AUDIT-C. The comparison revealed that participants' answers on the AUDIT-C were associated with extreme variability compared to their QDS answers. This variability suggests the AUDIT-C would be unreliable as a quantitative measure of alcohol consumption.The differences between the 3 alcohol use questions on the AUDIT-C and the same questions on the QDS may reflect the imprecision of the AUDIT-C's drinking response categories. Results suggest that the QDS can be used to identify risky drinking and to provide a more informative characterization of a drinker's alcohol consumption than that provided by the AUDIT-C.

Dataset Information

Results of the Brief Jail Mental Health Screen Across Repeated Jail Bookings.

Publications

Results of the Brief Jail Mental Health Screen Across Repeated Jail Bookings.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets