Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2023 Sep;30(9):927-934.
doi: 10.1111/acem.14735. Epub 2023 May 4.

Utilization of the Fordham Risk Screening Tool for violence risk assessment in an emergency department

Christopher W Racine  1 , Douglas N Johnston  1 , Kerry M Quigley  2 , Tania D Strout  3 , Linda S Durst  1 , Ben J Guido  1 , Lee A Wolfrum  1
Affiliations
Free article

Utilization of the Fordham Risk Screening Tool for violence risk assessment in an emergency department

Christopher W Racine et al. Acad Emerg Med. 2023 Sep.
Free article

Abstract

Background: Violence is a critical problem in the emergency department (ED) and patients experiencing mental health crises are at greater violence risk; however, tools appropriate for assessing violence risk in the ED are limited. Our goal was to evaluate the utility of the Fordham Risk Screening Tool (FRST) in reliability assessing violence risk in adult ED patients with acute mental health crises through evaluation of test characteristics compared to a reference standard.

Methods: We evaluated performance of the FRST when used with a convenience sample of ED patients undergoing acute psychiatric evaluation. Participants underwent assessment with the FRST and an established reference standard, the Historical Clinical Risk Management-20, Version 3 (HCR-20 V3). Diagnostic performance was assessed through evaluation of test characteristics and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC). Psychometric assessments examined the measurement properties of the FRST.

Results: A total of 105 participants were enrolled. In comparison to the reference standard, the AUROC for the predictive ability of the FRST was 0.88 (standard error 0.39, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.81-0.96). Sensitivity was 84% (95% CI 69%-94%) while specificity was 93% (95% CI 83%-98%). The positive predictive value was 87% (95% CI 73%-94%) and negative predictive value was 91% (95% CI 83%-86%). Psychometric analyses provided reliability and validity evidence for the FRST when used in the ED setting.

Conclusions: These findings support the potential utility of the FRST when used to assess violence risk in adult ED patients experiencing a mental health crisis. Future research with more diverse populations and ED settings is warranted.

Keywords: crisis assessment; risk assessment; screening tool; violence.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

REFERENCES

    1. Rosenthal LJ, Byerly A, Taylor AD, Martinovich Z. Impact and prevalence of physical and verbal violence toward healthcare workers. Psychosomatics. 2018;59:584-590.
    1. Speroni KG, Fitch T, Dawson E, Dugan L, Atherton M. Incidence and cost of nurse workplace violence perpetrated by hospital patients or patient visitors. J Emerg Nurs. 2014;40:218-228. quiz 95.
    1. Ayasreh IR, Hayajneh FA. Workplace violence against emergency nurses: a literature review. Crit Care Nurs Q. 2021;44:187-202.
    1. Stowell KR, Hughes NP, Rozel JS. Violence in the emergency department. Psychiatr Clin North Am. 2016;39:557-566.
    1. Heilbrun K, Wolbransky M, Shah S, Kelly R. Risk communication of terrorist acts, natural disasters, and criminal violence: comparing the processes of understanding and responding. Behav Sci Law. 2010;28:717-729.

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources