A Systematic Review of Reviews of Correctional Mental Health Services Using the STAIR Framework
BackgroundRising demand for correctional mental health services (CMHS) in recent decades has been a global phenomenon. Despite increasing research, there are major gaps in understanding the best models for CMHS and how to measure their effectiveness, particularly studies that consider the overall ca...
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Frontiers Media S.A.
2022-01-01
|
| Series: | Frontiers in Psychiatry |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyt.2021.747202/full |
| _version_ | 1819284732196683776 |
|---|---|
| author | Alexander I. F. Simpson Cory Gerritsen Margaret Maheandiran Vito Adamo Tobias Vogel Lindsay Fulham Tamsen Kitt Andrew Forrester Roland M. Jones |
| author_facet | Alexander I. F. Simpson Cory Gerritsen Margaret Maheandiran Vito Adamo Tobias Vogel Lindsay Fulham Tamsen Kitt Andrew Forrester Roland M. Jones |
| author_sort | Alexander I. F. Simpson |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | BackgroundRising demand for correctional mental health services (CMHS) in recent decades has been a global phenomenon. Despite increasing research, there are major gaps in understanding the best models for CMHS and how to measure their effectiveness, particularly studies that consider the overall care pathways and effectiveness of service responses. The STAIR (Screening, Triage, Assessment, Intervention, and Re-integration) model is an evidence-based framework that defines and measures CMHS as a clinical pathway with a series of measurable, and linked functions.MethodWe conducted a systematic review of the reviews of CMHS elements employing PRISMA guidelines, organized according to STAIR pillars. We assessed the quality of included studies using the AMSTAR-2 criteria. Narrative reviews were read and results synthesized.ResultsWe included 26 review articles of which 12 were systematic, metaanalyses, and 14 narrative reviews. Two systematic reviews and seven narrative reviews addressed screening and triage with strong evidence to support specific screening and triage systems. There was no evidence for standardised assessment approaches. Eight systematic reviews and seven narrative reviews addressed interventions providing some evidence to support specific psychosocial interventions. Three systematic reviews and six narrative reviews addressed reintegration themes finding relatively weak evidence to support reintegration methods, with interventions often being jurisdictionally specific and lacking generalizability.ConclusionsThe STAIR framework is a useful way to organize the extant literature. More research is needed on interventions, assessment systems, care pathway evaluations, and reintegration models. |
| first_indexed | 2024-12-24T01:52:03Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-a52925492ac848588e2b5d1fb1fae37d |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 1664-0640 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-12-24T01:52:03Z |
| publishDate | 2022-01-01 |
| publisher | Frontiers Media S.A. |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Frontiers in Psychiatry |
| spelling | doaj.art-a52925492ac848588e2b5d1fb1fae37d2022-12-21T17:21:41ZengFrontiers Media S.A.Frontiers in Psychiatry1664-06402022-01-011210.3389/fpsyt.2021.747202747202A Systematic Review of Reviews of Correctional Mental Health Services Using the STAIR FrameworkAlexander I. F. Simpson0Cory Gerritsen1Margaret Maheandiran2Vito Adamo3Tobias Vogel4Lindsay Fulham5Tamsen Kitt6Andrew Forrester7Roland M. Jones8Forensic Psychiatry, Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, CanadaDepartment of Forensic Psychiatry, Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, CanadaCentre for Addiction and Mental Health, Toronto, ON, CanadaDepartment of Forensic Psychiatry, Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, CanadaCentre for Addiction and Mental Health, Toronto, ON, CanadaDepartment of Forensic Psychiatry, Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, CanadaDepartment of Psychology, Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, CanadaForensic Psychiatry, Department of Psychological Medicine and Clinical Neursciences, School of Medicine, Cardiff University, Cardiff, United KingdomDepartment of Forensic Psychiatry, Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, CanadaBackgroundRising demand for correctional mental health services (CMHS) in recent decades has been a global phenomenon. Despite increasing research, there are major gaps in understanding the best models for CMHS and how to measure their effectiveness, particularly studies that consider the overall care pathways and effectiveness of service responses. The STAIR (Screening, Triage, Assessment, Intervention, and Re-integration) model is an evidence-based framework that defines and measures CMHS as a clinical pathway with a series of measurable, and linked functions.MethodWe conducted a systematic review of the reviews of CMHS elements employing PRISMA guidelines, organized according to STAIR pillars. We assessed the quality of included studies using the AMSTAR-2 criteria. Narrative reviews were read and results synthesized.ResultsWe included 26 review articles of which 12 were systematic, metaanalyses, and 14 narrative reviews. Two systematic reviews and seven narrative reviews addressed screening and triage with strong evidence to support specific screening and triage systems. There was no evidence for standardised assessment approaches. Eight systematic reviews and seven narrative reviews addressed interventions providing some evidence to support specific psychosocial interventions. Three systematic reviews and six narrative reviews addressed reintegration themes finding relatively weak evidence to support reintegration methods, with interventions often being jurisdictionally specific and lacking generalizability.ConclusionsThe STAIR framework is a useful way to organize the extant literature. More research is needed on interventions, assessment systems, care pathway evaluations, and reintegration models.https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyt.2021.747202/fullprisonsystematic reviewmental health careSTAIR modelscreening |
| spellingShingle | Alexander I. F. Simpson Cory Gerritsen Margaret Maheandiran Vito Adamo Tobias Vogel Lindsay Fulham Tamsen Kitt Andrew Forrester Roland M. Jones A Systematic Review of Reviews of Correctional Mental Health Services Using the STAIR Framework Frontiers in Psychiatry prison systematic review mental health care STAIR model screening |
| title | A Systematic Review of Reviews of Correctional Mental Health Services Using the STAIR Framework |
| title_full | A Systematic Review of Reviews of Correctional Mental Health Services Using the STAIR Framework |
| title_fullStr | A Systematic Review of Reviews of Correctional Mental Health Services Using the STAIR Framework |
| title_full_unstemmed | A Systematic Review of Reviews of Correctional Mental Health Services Using the STAIR Framework |
| title_short | A Systematic Review of Reviews of Correctional Mental Health Services Using the STAIR Framework |
| title_sort | systematic review of reviews of correctional mental health services using the stair framework |
| topic | prison systematic review mental health care STAIR model screening |
| url | https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyt.2021.747202/full |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT alexanderifsimpson asystematicreviewofreviewsofcorrectionalmentalhealthservicesusingthestairframework AT corygerritsen asystematicreviewofreviewsofcorrectionalmentalhealthservicesusingthestairframework AT margaretmaheandiran asystematicreviewofreviewsofcorrectionalmentalhealthservicesusingthestairframework AT vitoadamo asystematicreviewofreviewsofcorrectionalmentalhealthservicesusingthestairframework AT tobiasvogel asystematicreviewofreviewsofcorrectionalmentalhealthservicesusingthestairframework AT lindsayfulham asystematicreviewofreviewsofcorrectionalmentalhealthservicesusingthestairframework AT tamsenkitt asystematicreviewofreviewsofcorrectionalmentalhealthservicesusingthestairframework AT andrewforrester asystematicreviewofreviewsofcorrectionalmentalhealthservicesusingthestairframework AT rolandmjones asystematicreviewofreviewsofcorrectionalmentalhealthservicesusingthestairframework AT alexanderifsimpson systematicreviewofreviewsofcorrectionalmentalhealthservicesusingthestairframework AT corygerritsen systematicreviewofreviewsofcorrectionalmentalhealthservicesusingthestairframework AT margaretmaheandiran systematicreviewofreviewsofcorrectionalmentalhealthservicesusingthestairframework AT vitoadamo systematicreviewofreviewsofcorrectionalmentalhealthservicesusingthestairframework AT tobiasvogel systematicreviewofreviewsofcorrectionalmentalhealthservicesusingthestairframework AT lindsayfulham systematicreviewofreviewsofcorrectionalmentalhealthservicesusingthestairframework AT tamsenkitt systematicreviewofreviewsofcorrectionalmentalhealthservicesusingthestairframework AT andrewforrester systematicreviewofreviewsofcorrectionalmentalhealthservicesusingthestairframework AT rolandmjones systematicreviewofreviewsofcorrectionalmentalhealthservicesusingthestairframework |