BackgroundThere are well over a million homeless people in Western Europe and North America, but reliable estimates of the prevalence of major mental disorders among this population are lacking. We undertook a systematic review of surveys of such disorders in homeless people.Methods and FindingsWe searched for surveys of the prevalence of psychotic illness, major depression, alcohol and drug dependence, and personality disorder that were based on interviews of samples of unselected homeless people. We searched bibliographic indexes, scanned reference lists, and corresponded with authors. We explored potential sources of any observed heterogeneity in the estimates by meta-regression analysis, including geographical region, sample size, and diagnostic method. Twenty-nine eligible surveys provided estimates obtained from 5,684 homeless individuals from seven countries. Substantial heterogeneity was observed in prevalence estimates for mental disorders among the studies (all Cochran's χ2 significant at p < 0.001 and all I 2 > 85%). The most common mental disorders were alcohol dependence, which ranged from 8.1% to 58.5%, and drug dependence, which ranged from 4.5% to 54.2%. For psychotic illness, the prevalence ranged from 2.8% to 42.3%, with similar findings for major depression. The prevalence of alcohol dependence was found to have increased over recent decades.ConclusionsHomeless people in Western countries are substantially more likely to have alcohol and drug dependence than the age-matched general population in those countries, and the prevalences of psychotic illnesses and personality disorders are higher. Models of psychiatric and social care that can best meet these mental health needs requires further investigation.

The Modified Early Warning Score (MEWS) is now commonly used in the assessment of physically unwell patients in non‐acute hospital wards. The effect of the introduction of MEWS on the confidence of inpatient psychiatric nurses in identifying the severity of a physically deteriorating patient, and taking appropriate clinical action, has not been reported previously. The authors undertook a cross sectional survey looking at the level of confidence of qualified mental health nurses, and their ability to make correct clinical decisions, before and after introduction of the MEWS tool. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons

We describe the development and pilot testing of a novel, web-based, violence risk monitoring instrument for use in community patients with psychoses. We describe the development of the tool, including drawing on systematic reviews of the field, how item content was operationalized, the development of a user interface, and its subsequent piloting. Sixty-eight patients were included from three English counties, who had been discharged from forensic psychiatric services. Over 12 months, 310 questionnaires were completed on the sample by professionals from several disciplines and qualitative feedback collected relating to the use of the tool using an electronic survey. Strengths of this approach for risk assessment, and potential limitations and areas for future research, are discussed.

SummaryWith the subspecialisation of psychiatry in the UK, clinicians encounter problems at the interfaces between specialties. These can lead to tension between clinicians, which can be unhelpful to the clinical care of the patient. This article focuses on the interface between general and forensic psychiatry in England and Wales. The pattern of mental health services in England and Wales differs to an extent from those in Scotland, Northern Ireland and in the Republic of Ireland. Consequently, the interface between general and forensic psychiatry is subject to varying influences. Important interface issues include: the definition of a ‘forensic patient’; the remit and organisation of services; resources; clinical responsibility; and care pathways. This article also discusses a general overview of how to improve collaboration between forensic and general adult psychiatric services.Learning Objectives•Develop an understanding of important issues at the forensic/general adult psychiatry interface.•Be aware of areas of conflict that may arise at the forensic/general adult psychiatry interface.•Be aware of options for optimum cooperation at the interface.