The appropriateness of DUNDRUM-3 and DUNDRUM-4 for Māori in forensic mental health services in New Zealand: participatory action research.

Clicks: 348
ID: 95538
2020
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Emerging

Ranked #17 of 49 articles by views in BMC psychiatry

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Sign in to mint
Abstract
The Auckland Regional Forensic Psychiatry Services (ARFPS) in New Zealand has introduced structured clinical judgment instruments developed in Ireland (DUNDRUM-3 and DUNDRUM-4) to assist staff decision-making regarding service users' clinical pathways. In New Zealand, Māori (the indigenous people) constitute 43% of the in-patient forensic mental health population. The aim of this study was to determine the face validity of the measures for Māori.Participatory Action Research was aligned with a kaupapa Māori (Māori-orientated) research approach, to give full recognition to Māori cultural values. Two hui (gatherings) were held with Māori clinical and cultural experts at the service. The first hui (n = 12), explored the cultural appropriateness of the measures. The second (n = 10) involved a reflection on appropriate adaptions to the measures. Discussions were digitally recorded, transcribed and thematically analysed.Although the usefulness of the measures in enhancing the overall quality of clinical decision-making was confirmed, the DUNDRUM measures were considered to be limited in their ability to fully measure Māori service user progress and recovery. Suggestions were made to develop an additional 'pillar' focused on cultural identity and spirituality for DUNDRUM-3; to use both service user and family ratings for the adapted DUNDRUM-3 and DUNDRUM-4 measures; and to involve cultural expertise at the point of structured clinical judgement when using the measures.This is the first study to consider the face validity of the DUNDRUM-3 and DUNDRUM-4 for indigenous peoples, who are internationally over-represented in forensic mental health services. Suggested changes would require a negotiated, collaborative process between Māori cultural expertise and the original authors of the measures.
Reference Key
whareweramika2020thebmc Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Wharewera-Mika, Julie;Cooper, Erana;Wiki, Nick;Prentice, Kiri;Field, Trudie;Cavney, James;Kaire, David;McKenna, Brian;
Journal BMC psychiatry
Year 2020
DOI
10.1186/s12888-020-2468-x
URL
Keywords
dundrum toolkit forensic mental health services māori structured clinical judgement

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.