Psych MEQs / SAQs · Emergency psychiatry — violence risk
Violence risk assessment after named threats in first-episode psychosis (MEQ)
FRANZCP-style MEQ on violence risk assessment in untreated first-episode psychosis with substance use, weapons, named victim, SPJ formulation, and documentation.
On this page & tools
Target exams
Model answer
Reveal model answer
(i) Structured assessment. Ensure interview safety (staff, exit, search bag/weapon). Map current threats, intent now vs earlier, plan, target (flatmate), access, ability to resist. Detail violence history (wall punch, any other). Explore persecutory/TCO content, command hallucinations, insight. Substance timeline (meth). Mood, impulsivity, sleep, agitation. Collateral from flatmate/police. Capacity and legal options under local law (principles only). Parallel suicide/vulnerability enquiry. MSE with quoted content.[2][4]
(ii) Formulation factors. Static: male, young adult, early violence signal (wall punch), no prior service contact (limits known history). Dynamic: untreated first-episode psychosis with named victim, recent threats, knife access, meth use, agitation/guardedness, minimisation now. Protective: brought to care, some engagement possible, potential supports if engaged. Formulation: elevated near-term risk of harm to flatmate driven by untreated psychosis + substances + means + access; not reassured by denial alone.[1][2][3]
(iii) Illness–violence nuance. Association between psychosis and violence is real but modest at population level; most people with psychosis are never violent. Risk concentrates with substances, prior violence, and untreated first-episode periods (disproportionate share of psychosis-related homicide before treatment). Avoid stigma while acting on dynamic risk.[1][3]
(iv) Immediate plan. Secure knife; separate from flatmate; medical/psych work-up; consider admission (voluntary if capacity and agrees, otherwise least-restrictive compulsory pathway per jurisdiction). Treat psychosis urgently; address meth intoxication/withdrawal; de-escalate agitation. Lawful victim warning/police liaison if indicated. No discharge to shared housing with accessible weapons. Substance treatment as risk management.[1][4]
(v) Tools and documentation. Use imminent tools (e.g. DASA) once inpatient for shift-level aggression risk; longer SPJ-style formulation for ongoing plan — not a score alone. Document scenarios (who/what/when), drivers, actions (weapon, who informed), legal status, observation level, review time.[4][5]
Common errors
Common errors include equating diagnosis with permanent dangerousness; discharging on denial despite named target and weapon; ignoring methamphetamine; inventing Mental Health Act section numbers; documenting only "medium risk" without a plan; and using long-horizon actuarial thinking while missing imminent ward risk.[1][4]
References
- [1]Nielssen O, Large M Rates of homicide during the first episode of psychosis and after treatment: a systematic review and meta-analysis Schizophr Bull, 2010.PMID 18990713
- [2]Witt K, van Dorn R, Fazel S Risk factors for violence in psychosis: systematic review and meta-regression analysis of 110 studies PLoS One, 2013.PMID 23418482
- [3]Elbogen EB, Johnson SC The intricate link between violence and mental disorder: results from the National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions Arch Gen Psychiatry, 2009.PMID 19188537
- [4]Buchanan A Risk of violence by psychiatric patients: beyond the "actuarial versus clinical" assessment debate Psychiatr Serv, 2008.PMID 18245161
- [5]Ogloff JR, Daffern M The dynamic appraisal of situational aggression: an instrument to assess risk for imminent aggression in psychiatric inpatients Behav Sci Law, 2006.PMID 17171770