Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dk4vv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-24T00:36:07.511Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A standardised tool for assessing needs in forensic psychiatric population: clinical validation of the Italian CANFOR, staff version

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 October 2014

L. Castelletti ,
A. Lasalvia ,
E. Molinari ,
S. D. M. Thomas ,
E. Straticò  and
C. Bonetto
L. Castelletti*
Affiliation:
Ospedale Psichiatrico Giudiziario, Castiglione delle Stiviere (MN), Italy
A. Lasalvia
Affiliation:
Department of Public Health and Community Medicine, Section of Psychiatry, University of Verona, Verona, Italy
E. Molinari
Affiliation:
Ospedale Psichiatrico Giudiziario, Castiglione delle Stiviere (MN), Italy
S. D. M. Thomas
Affiliation:
Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, Australia
E. Straticò
Affiliation:
Ospedale Psichiatrico Giudiziario, Castiglione delle Stiviere (MN), Italy
C. Bonetto
Affiliation:
Department of Public Health and Community Medicine, Section of Psychiatry, University of Verona, Verona, Italy
*
*Address for correspondence: Dr Luca Castelletti, Ospedale Psichiatrico Giudiziario, località Ghisiola, 46043, Castiglione delle Stiviere (MN), Italy.  (Email: [email protected])
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Background.

The Camberwell Assessment of Need – Forensic Version (CANFOR) is a standardised assessment tool specifically designed to assess needs for care in forensic psychiatric populations. The original English version of the instrument has shown good psychometric properties. The aim of this study was to validate the Italian version of the CANFOR-staff tool.

Method.

After translation and back-translation, the Italian CANFOR tool was administered to a sample of 50 forensic psychiatric patients. Convergent validity was tested using the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS) and the Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF) by applying Kendall's tau-b. Inter-rater and test–retest reliabilities were measured by ICCs for need dimensions (total and unmet) and Cohen's kappa coefficients for individual need items.

Results.

Regarding convergent validity, a higher number of needs (total and unmet) were associated with more severe psychiatric symptoms (BPRS). Higher numbers of unmet needs were also associated with lower levels of global functioning (GAF). ICCs for total and unmet needs scores indicated a good level of agreement for inter-rater reliability and a very good level for test–retest, respectively. Regarding the specific items, inter-rater Cohen's kappa was high (moderate to very good agreement) for 18 items in relation to the presence of a need and for 15 items in the rating of an unmet need, whereas Cohen's kappa for test–retest reliability was very high for all the items in the presence of a need and high for 18 of the unmet need domains.

Conclusions.

The Italian version of CANFOR has adequate psychometric properties. It can be considered a promising instrument for the assessment of needs of forensic psychiatric patients.

Keywords

Diagnostic techniques and proceduresforensic psychiatryfunctional assessmentvalidation studies
Type
Instrument
Information
Epidemiology and Psychiatric Sciences , Volume 24 , Issue 3 , June 2015 , pp. 274 - 281
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2014 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

American Psychiatric Association (1994). DSM-IV. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th edn. American Psychiatric Association: Washington, DC.Google Scholar
Arvidsson, H (2003). Test–retest reliability of the Camberwell Assessment of Need (CAN). Nordic Journal of Psychiatry 57, 279–283.Google Scholar
Basaglia, F (1980). Problems of law and psychiatry: the Italian experience. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry 3, 17–37.Google Scholar
Cerboneschi, A, Bensi, M, Brandizzi, M, Dario, C, Fagioli, M, Fiori Nastro, P (2009). Characteristics in a sample of criminal mental hospital (Castiglione delle Stiviere) inmates discharged in the Lazio region (in Italian). Rivista di Psichiatria 44, 393–400.Google Scholar
DPCM 1.4.2008. Modalità e criteri per il trasferimento al Servizio sanitario nazionale delle funzioni sanitarie, dei rapporti di lavoro, delle risorse finanziarie e delle attrezzature e beni strumentali in materia di sanità penitenziaria. Gazz. Uff. 30 maggio 2008, n. 126.Google Scholar
Fioritti, A, Ferriani, E, Rucci, P, Melega, V, Venco, C, Scaramelli, AR, Santarini, F (2001). Predicting length of stay in Italian Psychiatric Forensic Hospitals: a survival analysis (in Italian). Epidemiologia e Psichiatria Sociale 10, 125–133.Google Scholar
Glorney, E, Perkins, D, Adshead, G, McGauley, G, Murray, K, Noak, J, Sichau, G (2010). Domains of need in a high security hospital setting: a model for streamlining care and reducing length of stay. International Journal of Forensic Mental Health 9, 138–148.Google Scholar
Harty, MA, Tighe, J, Leese, M, Thornicroft, G (2003). Inverse care for mentally ill prisoners: unmet needs in forensic mental health services. Journal of Forensic Psychiatry and Psychology 14, 600–614.Google Scholar
Hintze, J (2011). PASS 11. NCSS, LLC: Kaysville, Utah, USA.Google Scholar
Issakidis, C, Teesson, M (1999). Measurement of need for care: a trial of the Camberwell Assessment of Need and the Health of the Nation Outcome Scales. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry 33, 754–759.Google Scholar
Landis, J, Koch, G (1977). The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 33, 159–174.Google Scholar
Lasalvia, A, Ruggeri, M, Mazzi, MA, Dall'Agnola, RB (2000). The perception of needs for care in staff and patients in community-based mental health services. The South-Verona Outcome Project 3. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica 102, 366–375.Google Scholar
Leese, MN, White, IR, Schene, AH, Koeter, MWJ, Ruggeri, M, Gaite, L (2001). Reliability in multi-site psychiatric studies. International Journal of Methods in Psychiatric Research 10, 29–42.Google Scholar
Legge 17 febbraio 2012, n. 9. Gazzetta Ufficiale n. 42 del 20/02/2012. Retrieved 4 September 2014 from http://www.gazzettaufficiale.it/eli/id/2012/02/20/012G0026/sg.Google Scholar
Legge 30 maggio 2014, n. 81. Gazzetta Ufficiale n. 125 del 31/05/2014. Retrieved 4 September 2014 from http://www.gazzettaufficiale.it/eli/id/2014/5/31/14G00093/sg.Google Scholar
Long, CG, Webster, P, Waine, J, Motala, J, Hollin, CR (2008). Usefulness of the CANFOR-S for measuring needs among mentally disordered offenders resident in medium or low secure hospital services in the UK: a pilot evaluation. Criminal Behaviour and Mental Health 18, 39–48.Google Scholar
McCrone, P, Leese, M, Thornicroft, G, Schene, AH, Knudsen, HC, Vázquez-Barquero, JL, Lasalvia, A, Padfield, S, White, IR, Griffiths, G (2000). Reliability of the camberwell assessment of need–European Version. EPSILON Study 6. European psychiatric services: inputs linked to outcome domains and needs. British Journal of Psychiatry, (Suppl. 39), 34–40.Google Scholar
Phelan, M, Slade, M, Thornicroft, G, Dunn, G, Holloway, F, Wykes, T, Strathdee, G, Loftus, L, McCrone, P, Hayward, P (1995). The Camberwell Assessment of Need: the reliability and validity of an instrument to assess the needs of people with severe mental illness. British Journal of Psychiatry 167, 589–595.Google Scholar
Romeva, GE, Rubio, LG, Güerre, SO, Miravet, MJ, Cáceres, AG, Thomas, SD (2010). Clinical validation of the CANFOR scale (Camberwell Assessment of Need-Forensic version) for the needs assessment of people with mental health problems in the forensic services. Actas Espanola di Psiquiatria 38, 129–137.Google Scholar
Roncone, R, Ventura, J, Impallomeni, M, Falloon, IR, Morosini, PL, Chiaravalle, E, Casacchia, M (1999). Reliability of an Italian standardized and expanded Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS 4.0) in raters with high vs. low clinical experience. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica 100, 229–236.Google Scholar
Segal, A, Daffern, M, Thomas, S, Ferguson, M (2010). Needs and risks of patients in a state-wide inpatient forensic mental health population. International Journal of Mental Health Nursing 19, 223–230.Google Scholar
Shaw, J (2002). Needs assessment for mentally disordered offenders is different. Journal of Forensic Psychiatry 13, 14–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Talina, M, Thomas, S, Cardoso, A, Aguiar, P, Caldas de Almeida, JM, Xavier, M (2013). CANFOR Portuguese version: validation study. BMC Psychiatry 13, 157.Google Scholar
Thomas, SD, Harty, MA, Parrot, J, McCrone, P, Slade, M, Thornicroft, G (2003). Camberwell Assessment of Need – Forensic Version. Gaskell: London.Google Scholar
Thomas, SD, Slade, M, McCrone, P, Harty, MA, Parrott, J, Thornicroft, G, Leese, M (2008). The reliability and validity of the forensic Camberwell Assessment of Need (CANFOR): a needs assessment for forensic mental health service users. International Journal of Methods in Psychiatric Research 17, 111–120.Google Scholar
Ventura, J, Lukoff, D, Nuechterlein, KH, Liberman, RP, Green, MF, Shaner, A (1993). Manual for the Expanded Brief Psychiatric rating Scale. International Journal of Methods in Psychiatric Research 3, 227–244.Google Scholar