Broadmoor Hospital, Crowthorne, Berkshire
Institute of Psychiatry, London, UK
Correspondence: Liz Jamieson, Lecturer, Broadmoor Hospital, Crowthorne, Berkshire RG45 7EG, UK
![]() |
ABSTRACT |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
Aims To test a hypothesis that, under current services and laws (from the mid-1980s), no one leaving high-security hospitals remains indefinitely institutionalised.
Method The special hospitals' case register was used for case ascertainment and admission data; post-discharge data were collected from multiple sources on patients discharged in 1984 (census date 31.12.1995).
Results In this discharge cohort (n=223), 36 (17%) did not return to the community: 17 died in special hospital and 19 continuously lived in other institutions until death or the census date. Over two-thirds of these had mental illness, were older on admission and had lived longer in special hospital than their better-rehabilitated peers. Offending history was irrelevant to this. Most post-discharge institution time was in open psychiatric hospital, or back in special hospital, not in medium secure units or prison.
Conclusions The hypothesis was not sustained, but fewer people never reached the community than before the mid-1980s. Atypical antipsychotics might reduce this number. We found no justification for a new tier of long-term medium secure units.
![]() |
INTRODUCTION |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
Our study was designed to conduct the longest possible follow-up of place of residence for all patients discharged from special hospital in 1 year within the current legislative and service framework. The principal hypothesis was that no patient leaving special hospital would remain indefinitely institutionalised. A subsidiary hypothesis was that reoffending would be associated with community living. Were a continuously institutionalised group to be identified, it was proposed to test demographic, disorder and offending characteristics at the time of admission and departure as possible early indicators of special rehabilitative need.
![]() |
METHOD |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
Data extraction
The special hospitals' case register was used to identify patients in this
discharge cohort. The register was set up in 1972 and holds admission and
discharge details, as well as socio-demographic and criminological data, on
all special hospital patients admitted since then (and more limited data on
the 1977 resident cohort). Data are collected for the case register from both
hospital and other records and from patient interview.
Mental Health Act 1983 classification of mental disorder is the principal indicator of diagnosis. These classes do map closely onto diagnostic categories as defined in ICD-10: mental illness on psychotic disorders, mainly schizophrenia; psychopathic disorder on personality disorders; (severe) mental impairment on (severe) mental retardation (Taylor et al, 1998).
In regard to the index offence, none implies that there was no index charge or conviction, not that there had been no violent or dangerous behaviour. Property offences relate to arson or serious property damage, and other offences include burglary or attempt, theft, non-indictable assault, breach of the peace and other indictable offences.
Length of follow-up
Data were recorded from the date of formal discharge from special hospital
(or date of departure if leaving on trial leave) until the last known
placement, or to the census date of 31 December 1995 or until death, whichever
was earlier (maximum 12 years).
Sources of follow-up data
Analyses
![]() |
RESULTS |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
Of the 206 patients available to follow-up, 198 had either a full follow-up record for the 12 years (n=93; 47%) or, if follow-up was not complete, it was at least possible to determine whether community living had been achieved or not (n=105; 53%). One patient was repatriated to his country of origin and no further information could be traced. In 7 other cases (3%), 2 of whom died during follow-up, it was impossible to say whether a community placement was attained or not; the remaining 5 patients did not appear on the national death register, nor on any central National Health Service record, nor in official criminal statistics. It was assumed that they were alive and living in the community. Nevertheless, because of the possibility of other explanations, including human error on the national databases or use of aliases by these patients, these 7 were treated as not knowns. Thus, together with the repatriated patient, 8 patients were excluded from further analysis and there was a total cohort of 215 for study (inclusive of the deaths in special hospital).
This discharge cohort was larger than the average for 1986-1990 (n=183) but similar to the average for the next 5 years (1991-1995) (n=224). Between 1986 and 1995, however, there was an increase in the discharge of patients admitted on remand orders (pre-trial or pre-sentencing) from 14% to 16% respectively of the total discharged in each year, compared with only 2 patients from the 1984 discharge cohort. This meant that in 1984 the discharge cohort size of patients who had remained in special hospital for treatment was larger than the average for the subsequent decade. The distribution by gender, nature of index offence, previous offending, death in special hospital and length of stay up to the point of discharge was, however, typical of cohorts between 1986 and 1995 (Butwell et al, 2000; Jamieson et al, 2000).
Of the 198 patients with some follow-up, 179 (90%) were discharged to the community at some point (the community group). However, 19 (10%) continued to live in other hospitals or prisons, or returned to special hospital without any residential community time up to either the date of their death or to the census date of 31 December 1995 (the institutional group).
Deaths in special hospital
Of those who died in special hospital during 1984, 10 were men (6% of men
in the discharge cohort) and 7 were women (18% of women in the discharge
cohort). This gender difference was significant (2=6.8,
d.f.=1, P=0.009).
Deaths outside special hospital
There were a further 32 deaths among the other departures (whose community
career was known) over the 12 years of the study, with no significant
male/female differences overall, within or outside institutions. Of these
deaths, 7 occurred before the patients had reached community living; there had
been no immediate prospect of discharge to the community in any of these
cases. There was only 1 woman in the group who did not reach the community;
she died in institutional care. Of the 25 deaths in the group reaching the
community, 1 occurred in hospital, after a readmission; 24 people were living
in the wider community at the time of death.
Of the 24 deaths in the institutional group, 4 were unnatural deaths (two
accidental and two open verdicts). Of the 25 deaths in the community group, 11
were unnatural deaths (3 suicide, 4 accidental and 4 open verdicts). This
higher proportion of unnatural deaths in the community group was statistically
significant (2=4.31, d.f.=1, P=0.038), as shown in
Table 1.
|
Indicators at discharge of long-term residential needs outside high
security
Table 1 summarises this
position, treating the readmission death as a death in the community group.
Overall, 36 (17%) of the 215 in the traced discharge cohort did not again live
in the community by the end of the study; the deaths made certain that 24 of
them never would.
There was a significant difference in age distribution at time of discharge, by death and community status. This was accounted for by the tendency for the institutional group to be older than the community group, and within each group the deaths to have affected those who were older at the time of discharge. Few patients, however, attained 70 years of age. The median age of death for the institutional group was 49.9 years (22.8-76.4 years) and for the community group 51.1 years (25.8-69.7 years). The survivors had a median age of 52.1 years (31.9-67.3 years) and 44.4 years (29.3-83.6 years), respectively, at the end of the follow-up. The groups varied in length of stay in special hospital, with the institutional group having stayed longer (particularly accounted for by those who died there). The distribution appeared to differ according to class of disorder, although this did not reach statistical significance. Relatively more of the people in the group with mental illness failed to reach or survive in the community compared with the groups with developmental disorder (psychopathic disorder and (severe) mental impairment). Gender had no bearing on these equations, nor did the special hospital of principal residence.
The multinomial logistic regression analysis showed that age on discharge was significantly associated with the dead-in-institution group compared with the base category (relative risk ratio (RRR) 1.07, 95% CI 1.02-1.13, P=0.011) and with the dead-in-the-community group (RRR 1.07, 95% CI 1.02-1.12, P=0.006). There was no association between age on discharge and the alive-in-institution group compared with the base category. Length of stay was only associated with the dead-in-institution group compared with the base category (RRR 1.07, 95% CI 1.00-1.15, P=0.037). MHA classification of disorder on discharge was not associated with any of the three groups compared with the base category.
Logistic regression to examine the independent effects on the likelihood of attaining community status at all showed that effects of length of follow-up approached but did not reach significance (B=-0.1362, s.e.=0.0809, P=0.0924, exp(B)=0.8727). Length of high-security hospital residence had a significant effect on attainment of community status (B=-0.0572, s.e.=0.0270, P=0.0341, exp(B)=0.9444), with shorter length of previous special hospital stay increasing the likelihood of attaining community status.
Indicators at admission of long-term residential needs outside high
security
Disorder class on admission was associated with post-discharge residential
group; people with mental illness were least likely to return to community
living (2=25.2, d.f.=9, P=0.003). Change in MHA
classification of disorder during special hospital residence occurred in 13
cases (mental illness to personality disorder in 5 of these) and probably
accounted for this deviation from discharge findings, even though in
statistical terms the disorder classes could be treated as the same at
admission as at discharge (kappa=0.9)
(Table 2).
|
Neither seriousness of index offence nor seriousness of previous criminal career in terms of the measures shown in Table 2 were significantly associated with failure to return to the community. The type of MHA detention order was so associated, however, with civil detention accounting for proportionately more continuously institutionalised cases. (A civil order generally indicated a long career of violent, disruptive and other dangerous, non-criminalised behaviour in previous hospital placements.)
Logistic regression was used to examine whether or not community status was attained (regardless of death). No independently significant effects of age, MHA disorder classification on admission or gender were found.
Facilities used by those who lived outside high-security hospital but
did not return to community residence
The total follow-up time available for those who left high-security
hospital alive, but did not return to community residence, was 219
patient-years. The real follow-up time was shortened to 169 patient-years
because of the 7 deaths in this group. Therefore the deaths foreshortened the
available time by 23%.
Table 3 shows that, for those people who did not live in the community again, most time was spent in ordinary general psychiatric hospitals. Time back in special hospital was second in duration for those who were still alive at the end of the study. Purpose-designed, specialist medium secure units had almost no part to play for the longer-term care of this group, and people were rarely returned to prison. (The 4 returning to prison were on sections 47/49 (n=3) or were charged with a new offence while still under sections 37/41 (n=1).)
|
For patients who did reach the community (whether or not they died there), two-thirds of the available time was spent in the community. About one-quarter to one-sixth of the time was spent in ordinary general psychiatric hospitals, and much less in readmission to special hospital. Very little time was spent in regional secure units or prison.
Table 3 shows that the distribution of type of institutional time differed between the groups. This is mainly accounted for by the short time spent back in special hospital by the groups of people who died (within or outside institutions) and the proportionately longer time by the continuously institutionalised group. The group still alive at the end of the study, but with community living experience, had collectively spent more time in prison but this nevertheless occupied a small part of the time.
Readmission to special hospital
Readmissions to high-security hospital were over twice as likely in the
continuously institutionalised group than in the group reaching the community
at some point: 7/19 (37%) v. 31/179 (17%). Readmissions typically
occurred soon after discharge (or departure). There was no significant
difference in the median survival times to readmission between the three
groups (P=0.06): continuously institutionalised group (1.79 years,
0.41-5.34 years); alive-in-the-community group (1.33 years,
0.02-8.47 years); dead-in-the-community group (2.52 years,
1.85-3.53).
One man in the continuously institutionalised group had had a further trial in lesser security, which had broken down, resulting in a second admission. Deteriorating psychosis (3 cases), violent behaviour (3 cases) and repeated absconding (1 case) accounted for the returns in the continuously institutionalised group. Assaultive behaviour of various kinds was the most usual reason for return to high security in the community group, with a few readmissions for mental health reasons or absconding behaviour.
Of the 7 readmitted to high security from the continuously institutionalised group, 6 were still resident in special hospital at the end of the study. One man had a second readmission. The median readmission time was 9.15 years (4.48-10.76 years). This meant that the median total length of time in special hospital for this group (to the end of 1995 only, inclusive of previous admissions) was 17.08 years (9.68-31.72 years), a figure very much higher than the median for men within the 1984 discharge cohort as a whole, which was 7.02 years (0.02-42.74 years).
Reconvictions after high-security hospital discharge
Overall, 69 (36%) of the 192 people for whom criminal records were traced
had reoffended, not necessarily seriously. Reoffending certainly did not occur
in the tiny group (6) who left high-security hospital but died in another
institution; however, 4 of the 18 (one not known) (22%) who were surviving in
institutions had reoffended. Nevertheless, this was a smaller proportion than
that of the reoffending subgroup (65, 37%) among those who had at some point
reached the community (23=11.7,
P=0.008).
These findings thus disproved the hypothesis that reoffending would be uniquely associated with community living. The 4 institutionalised men who were convicted of a criminal offence were living in non-secure hospitals at the time. Their offences, all serious and three committed outside the hospital, played a part in their continued failure to attain community living. Of these, 3 men (2 suffering from mental illness and 1 from psychopathic disorder) were readmitted to special hospital, and 1 received a prison sentence. It was unclear why a prison sentence had been handed down to this man, who was manifestly psychotic at the time of the offence and did not cope with his imprisonment; he lost remission for fighting. The 4 did not have extensive previous criminal records compared with their 14 chronically institutionalised peers. Before special hospital admission, 2 did not have an index offence; 1 of the other 2 had been admitted after a non-violent offence; and the fourth had an index offence of arson.
![]() |
DISCUSSION |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
A more positive construction from the patients' perspective is that, of the high-security hospital patients discharged to other facilities, only 10% failed to reach community residence. This is a lower proportion than in Norris's (1984) study (22%), suggesting a possibility that, in the intervening years, the increased scope for challenge to detention, increased range of service provision, or both, might have had some impact. The Norris follow-up time, however, was shorter (7 years).
Implications for service planning
For all practical purposes, once accepted for treatment in a high-security
hospital, patients may expect one of three longer-term outcomes on discharge:
return directly to the community (for a minority 38% in 1984); return
to the community after a period of residence in other hospitals; or indefinite
residence in hospital, inclusive of return to special hospital in about
one-third of these cases. This minority of special hospital returns (17%
overall) is similar to that found in most other studies
(Tong & Mackay, 1959;
Gathercole et al,
1968; Bailey & MacCulloch,
1992). The exception is a study from one large secure unit in
England (Cope & Ward,
1993), which reported the return of one-third of cases received
there.
Medium secure hospital provision in the UK is currently designed for patients needing a period of residence of up to 2 years, although a few stay longer. Our study suggests that current medium secure provision has an insignificant long-term role for progressing high-security patients, and that they can be managed in general psychiatric units. Our data do not suggest that this balance of service use is inappropriate, or that there is a case to be made from data on departing high-security hospital patients for the creation of yet another new category of service. The concept of long-term medium-security hospital provision has become popular in the UK, but it is a concept with little refinement (Taylor et al, 1996). For people who can be managed without security, whether in the community or in open hospitals, there can be no case for long-term medium security. In our series, 4 men did offend while resident in an open hospital, but there was no evidence that they could not have been managed within the present service organisations with more flexible use of current medium security, or even low security. The very small numbers of patients in the continuously institutionalised group who returned to high security did not appear to constitute a demand for a whole new tier of service, even if repeated for each discharge cohort. Then, as those not reaching the community were more likely to have a psychotic illness than any other condition, improvements in anti-psychotic medication might be expected to reduce the size of the residual institutionalised group further.
Gender
The finding that it was mainly men with mental illness who were
continuously institutionalised is comparable with findings among patients in
general psychiatry services (Lelliott
et al, 1994). This too was a national study, drawing data
from psychiatrists in 59 services in the UK. The patients were between 18 and
64 years of age on admission, and had been hospitalised for between 6 months
and 3 years. New long-stay subjects were younger (18-34 years), predominantly
single men with schizophrenia; 43% of these had a history of serious violence,
dangerous behaviour or admission to a special hospital, and over one-third
were formally detained.
Limitations and directions for future research
Collection of data for this type of study is difficult and very
time-consuming, and there is a loss of traces over the years. It does,
however, offer some gain in knowledge for service planning.
Some subgroups of interest examined here are very small. Furthermore, simple concepts of community or institutional residence are not adequate for understanding the whole picture in some cases. Some people living in hospitals appeared to have been spending much of their days outside those hospitals in the wider community, whereas patients in some of the hostel placements (designated community placements) appeared to be more supervised and observed than those in some hospitals. From the records available, however, it would seem that the recording of data was not significantly consistent to quantify these issues further. A prospective study with greater clarity on the nature and intensity of observation, supervision, asylum and support is indicated.
![]() |
Clinical Implications and Limitations |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
LIMITATIONS
![]() |
REFERENCES |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
Buchanan, A. (1998) Criminal conviction after discharge from special (high security) hospital. Incidence in the first 10 years. British Journal of Psychiatry, 172, 472-476.[Abstract]
Butwell, M., Jamieson, E., Leese, M., et al
(2000) Trends in special (high-security) hospitals. 2:
Residency and discharge episodes, 1986-1995. British Journal of
Psychiatry, 176,
260-265.
Cope, R. & Ward, M. (1993) What happens to special hospital patients admitted to medium security? Journal of Forensic Psychiatry, 4, 13-24.
Gathercole, C. E., Craft, M. J., McDougall, J. M., et al (1968) A review of 100 discharges from a special hospital. British Journal of Criminology, 8, 419-424.
Home Office & Department of Health and Social Security (1975) Report of the Committee on Mentally Abnormal Offenders (The Butler Report) (Cm 6244). London: HMSO.
Jamieson, E., Butwell, M., Taylor, P. J., et al
(2000) Trends in special (high-security) hospitals. I:
Referrals and admissions 1986-1995. British Journal of
Psychiatry, 176,
253-259.
Lelliott, P., Wing, J. & Clifford, P. (1994) A national audit of new long-stay psychiatric patients. I: Method and description of the cohort. British Journal of Psychiatry, 165, 160-169.[Abstract]
Norris, M. (1984) Integration of Special Hospital Patients into the Community. Aldershot: Gower.
Snowden, P. R. (1985) A survey of the Regional Secure Unit programme. British Journal of Psychiatry, 147, 499-507.[Abstract]
StataCorp (1997) Stata Statistical Software. Release 6.0. College Station, TX: Stata Corporation.
Taylor, P. J., Maden, A. & Jones, D. (1996) Long term medium security hospital units: a service gap of the 1990s? Criminal Behaviour & Mental Health, 6, 213-229.
Taylor, P. J., Leese, M., William, D., et al (1998) Mental disorder and violence. A special (high-security) hospital study. British Journal of Psychiatry, 172, 218-226.[Abstract]
Tong, J. E. & Mackay, G. W. (1959) A statistical follow-up of mental defectives of dangerous or violent propensities. British Journal of Delinquency, 9, 276-284.
Received for publication July 9, 2001. Revision received May 23, 2002. Accepted for publication June 26, 2002.
Related articles in BJP:
HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
Psychiatric Bulletin | Advances in Psychiatric Treatment | All RCPsych Journals |