This page was translated automatically from Turkish. Read the original

This page is an AI-assisted Turkish summary of the study presented at the 26th World Congress of Psychiatry. The study belongs to the presenting authors; please refer to the original source when citing it.

EV0619

Structured violence risk profiles among psychiatric inpatients with different clinical and legal statuses: a retrospective SOROP-based study

STRUCTURED VIOLENCE RISK PROFILES AMONG PSYCHIATRIC INPATIENTS WITH DIFFERENT CLINICAL AND LEGAL STATUSES: A RETROSPECTIVE SOROP-BASED STUDY

Structured assessment using SOROP revealed violence risk profiles that differed markedly by legal status, with the highest mean score observed in the special supervision group.

The study aimed to compare SOROP-based violence risk profiles among psychiatric inpatients with different clinical and legal statuses. Its rationale was that structured risk assessment improves transparency and consistency in identifying patients at high risk of dangerous behavior compared with unstructured clinical judgment. The records of 72 inpatients at Fergana Regional Psychiatric Hospital in Uzbekistan were retrospectively reviewed, and patients were divided into three groups by legal status: compulsory treatment (n = 27), special supervision (n = 25), and general inpatients (n = 20). The groups were compared in terms of demographic characteristics, diagnoses, and SOROP scores. In the compulsory treatment group, 96.3% of patients were male; mean age across the groups ranged from 40.7 to 49.8 years. Mean SOROP scores were 27.7 in the compulsory treatment group, 33.0 in the special supervision group, and −8.3 among general inpatients. Schizophrenia spectrum diagnoses were more common in the higher-risk groups. The authors state that SOROP-based assessment revealed clinically meaningful differences in violence risk between inpatient groups, that the high scores among patients under special supervision support the use of structured risk assessment to inform enhanced monitoring, and that the tool’s predictive validity needs to be confirmed in larger prospective studies.

All WCP 2026 summaries