Assessment 2: Critical Review Assessment type Essay Word limit / length 2,000 words Weighting 40%...

Question

Assessment 2: Critical Review Assessment type Essay Word limit / length 2,000 words Weighting 40% Due date Wednesday 23rd September at 11 pm AEST Week 4 Overview Risk assessment in mental health settings is one of the most challenging roles of the mental health professional. This assessment is designed to encourage you to explore the most recent evidence that informs best practice in conducting risk assessments in acute mental health. Learning outcomes This assessment task is aligned to the following learning outcomes: 2. Appraise a range of acute care conditions engagement and interventions 3. Appraise a range of complex acute care conditions engagement and interventions 4. Critically reflect on acute mental health risk factors, engagement, observation and interventions Assessment details Write an essay that: - Provides a brief overview of the type of risk assessments that are necessary to consider in acute mental health  10 | P a g e - Critiques the effectiveness or accuracy of available risk assessment tools/methods - Discusses how the risk assessment process could be improved or optimised, ensuring your arguments are evidence based. Submission format Please upload your assessment as a Word document via Turnitin in Blackboard.  11 | P a g e Assessment 2 rubric (total marks = 40) Criterion Marks HD DI CR PA Fail Introduction & Conclusion 5 Excellent introduction. Clear and succinct. Outstandingly written conclusion. Introduction is very good. Excellent, insightful conclusion. Competently written introduction. Good conclusion with some good insights. Adequate introduction and adequate conclusion. Description is vague or poorly outlined. Poor or lacking conclusion. Succinct overview of all type of risk assessments conducted in the acute mental health setting 10 Key risk assessments succinctly & outstandingly described. Key risk assessments succinctly & clearly described. Key risk assessments well described. Key risk assessments adequately described Key risk assessments not described or poorly described Critiques the effectiveness or accuracy of risk assessment tools/methods and discusses how the risk assessment process could be optimised 20 Outstanding critique of risk assessment approaches and how the process could be optimised. Excellent incorporation of evidence and demonstration of understanding is clearly articulated. Excellent critique of risk assessment approaches and how the process could be optimised. Excellent incorporation of evidence and demonstration of understanding articulated. Good critique of risk assessment approaches and how the process could be optimised. Good incorporation of evidence and demonstration of understanding articulated. Adequate critique of risk assessment approaches and how the process could be optimised. Adequate incorporation of evidence and demonstration of understanding articulated. Limited or poorly articulated understanding demonstrated. Writing, grammar and referencing 5 Clear, crisp and coherent style. Very well organised. Free of grammar and spelling errors. All citations follow required style. Clear, coherent style. Well organised. Mostly free of grammatical and spelling errors. Citations follow required style. Small errors. Competently written. Clear structure with few grammatical errors Most citations follow required style. Some errors. Writing is adequate. Structure could be clearer. Grammatical errors. Some citations follow required style. Errors. Poorly written, little attention to spelling and punctuation. Poorly structured. Citations do not follow required style.  12 | P a g e

Sunabh · Accepted Answer

Running Head: ASSESSMENT 2: CRITICAL REVIEW	1
ASSESSMENT 2: CRITICAL REVIEW		11
HEALTHCARE
ASSESSMENT 2: CRITICAL REVIEW
Table of Contents
Introduction	3
Overview of the Type of Risk Assessments Necessary in Acute Mental Health	3
Critique of Effectiveness or Accuracy of Available Risk Assessment Tools/Methods	5
Potential Improvements in Risk Assessment Process	7
Conclusion	9
References	10
Introduction	
Risk assessments are combined efforts of identification and analysis for the potential events, which can negatively affect any individual, environment, assets and healthcare is no exception. Risk assessments in mental health combine the considerations of social and psychological wellbeing of an individual. Major purpose of risk evolution is to plan or make decisions based upon the outcomes received from risk analysis.
This paper will discuss the importance of risk assessments to be necessarily consider in mental health assessment. Further, efforts would be made to present critique for the effectiveness or accuracy of available risk assessment tools. Likewise, this paper will conclude with the discussion of potential improvements in risk assessment process emphasising upon acute mental health services.
Overview of the Type of Risk Assessments Necessary in Acute Mental Health
	Mental health is one of the most neglected aspects in the society. Risk assessment of the patients in general practice for those suffering from mental health issues is a challenging area in the field of clinical practice. It would be essential to understand that risk cannot be eliminated; however, it can be managed, assessed or mitigated. Therefore, managing, assessing or mitigation of the risk is dependent upon risk identification. It is an integral process towards ensuring a safe and effective care as well as decision making on transition between the services. 
	Risk can be highly dynamic and is majorly dependent upon circumstances, which might change over briefest of time. Therefore, it would be essential to understand that risk assessment would require inclusion of short-term perspective as well as frequent view. Further, every mental health professional has a specific role to play in both risk assessment and management. This is majorly because perspectives of all the professionals need to be taken into account while formulating for a risk assessment or risk management plan. 
As supported by the recovery approach, overall treatment and assessment plan should be prepared with the service user in order to consider their perspectives also as an integral part of risk assessment plan (Duffy, Davidson & Kavanagh, 2016). It would be essential to understand that risk can be safely identified if all the parameters associated with individual’s functioning are taken into consideration. Therefore, four essential parameters to be examined for risk assessment include history, clinical, disposition and context.
Structured professional judgment (SPJ) is one of the most widely used risk assessment tools in acute mental health settings. SJP requires the psychiatrist or the physician to develop various independent risk factors. Development of these risk factors might be followed by weighing each of these factors; thus, facilitating judgment. The physicians or the care providers at mental health develop an initial opinion about the risk.
This is usually documented as low, medium or even high by any mental health clinician, can use this approach. Further, taking into consideration busy mental health services, risk documentation is completed by the use of ‘system 1’ thinking. Kannengiesser and Gero (2019) mentioned and argued upon the fact that System 1 thinking is rapid, emotional as well as instinctive compared to system 2 thinking, which is logical and more deliberate. In acute mental health settings, clinicians might rely on the use of ‘cognitive short cuts’. 
These allow them to make judgments, which might have some kind of validity; however, upon scrutiny, could lead to misleading heuristics. One of the most common examples can be availability bias, this include the tendency to focus upon a specific piece of information by ease, through which it could be easily retrieved from the memory and this could lead to poor or false judgments. Further, it would be essential to consider that risk assessment should include key factors, which would then indicate a pattern or a significant increase in the level of risk. Some risks might be specific and could be associated with specific individuals only.
Accordingly,

Assessment 2: Critical Review Assessment type Essay Word limit / length 2,000 words Weighting 40% Due date Wednesday 23rd September at 11 pm AEST Week 4 Overview Risk assessment in mental health...

Answer To: Assessment 2: Critical Review Assessment type Essay Word limit / length 2,000 words Weighting 40%...

Answer To This Question Is Available To Download

Related Questions & Answers

Submit New Assignment