Skip to main content
MedVellum
QuestionsVideosPricing

MedVellum

Fellowship exam preparation across every specialty: source-verified topics, questions in every format, and videos.

Product

  • Specialties
  • Questions
  • Videos
  • Exam tools
  • Pricing

Verification & policy

  • Verified register
  • Editorial policy
  • Privacy
  • Terms

Account

  • Sign in
  • Create account
  • Dashboard
  • Account & billing

© 2026 MedVellum. For education only — not a substitute for clinical judgement.

llms.txtPsychiatry LLM catalogSitemap

Psych TopicsForensic psychiatry — therapeutic security

Psych · Forensic psychiatry — therapeutic security

Therapeutic security and secure care levels

Also known as Therapeutic security · Secure care levels · High medium low secure · Forensic secure hospital · Relational security · Physical procedural relational security · DUNDRUM triage security · Stratified forensic care · Forensic mental health security

Exam-exhaustive fellowship reference on therapeutic security and secure care levels — physical, procedural and relational domains; high/medium/low secure definitions; DUNDRUM-style triage and recovery; relational security practice; step-up/step-down; long-stay; discharge outcomes. FRANZCP-primary, globally tagged.

medium20 referencesUpdated 26 July 202613 min readVerification in progress

Practise this topic

  • 10 MCQs

Your progress

Saved on this device.

Practise this topic10 MCQs with explanations

Target exams

FRANZCPMRCPsychABPNMD-DNBNEET-SS

Red flags

  • Grave and immediate risk of serious harm with high escape potential managed on an open or inadequately secure ward — escalate placement assessment urgently
  • Patient stuck long-term in high or medium security without active recovery, programme, or discharge-barrier review — restart stratified recovery planning
  • Security reduced to fences and searches while staff do not know the patient — relational security failure is a clinical safety crisis
  • Seclusion or restraint used as a substitute for an appropriate secure care level or treatment plan — reframe to least-restrictive therapeutic security
  • Planned step-down or leave without multi-source risk review after recent violence, abscond, or substance relapse — pause and reassess
  • Discharge from secure care without forensic aftercare, housing, or crisis plan — post-discharge harm and readmission risk is material
On this page
Study tools

Your progress

Saved on this device.

Practise this topic10 MCQs with explanations

Target exams

FRANZCPMRCPsychABPNMD-DNBNEET-SS

Red flags

  • Grave and immediate risk of serious harm with high escape potential managed on an open or inadequately secure ward — escalate placement assessment urgently
  • Patient stuck long-term in high or medium security without active recovery, programme, or discharge-barrier review — restart stratified recovery planning
  • Security reduced to fences and searches while staff do not know the patient — relational security failure is a clinical safety crisis
  • Seclusion or restraint used as a substitute for an appropriate secure care level or treatment plan — reframe to least-restrictive therapeutic security
  • Planned step-down or leave without multi-source risk review after recent violence, abscond, or substance relapse — pause and reassess
  • Discharge from secure care without forensic aftercare, housing, or crisis plan — post-discharge harm and readmission risk is material
The one-line answer

Therapeutic security is the deliberate integration of physical, procedural, and relational measures — with relational security as the therapeutic core — that places a person with mental disorder at the least restrictive secure level (high, medium, low, open, or community) that safely enables treatment, then steps down as risk and recovery change. It avoids both under-security (escape and serious harm) and over-security (lost liberty, cost, and institutionalisation).[1][3][6][11]

Meet the patient

A man on remand for a violent index offence is transferred to your regional medium secure unit with treatment-resistant psychosis, a recent abscond attempt, and escalating threats toward a named victim. The nursing team asks where he should be placed and what "secure" actually means for him.[1][5][18]

The examiner's question is never "list the locks." It is: "At what level do you nurse him, and on what evidence do you move him down the ladder?" This topic answers that question.[1][3][15]

Psychiatry Fellowship Pro

Continue reading

You have read the opening of this topic. The complete unit — every section and its primary-source references — is part of the Psychiatry Fellowship fellowship library.

Sign in to continueSee pricing
References20ShowHide
  1. [1]Flynn G, O'Neill C, McInerney C, et al. The DUNDRUM-1 structured professional judgment for triage to appropriate levels of therapeutic security: retrospective-cohort validation study BMC Psychiatry, 2011.PMID 21410967
  2. [2]Flynn G, O'Neill C, Kennedy HG. DUNDRUM-2: Prospective validation of a structured professional judgment instrument assessing priority for admission from the waiting list for a forensic mental health hospital BMC Res Notes, 2011.PMID 21722397
  3. [3]Davoren M, O'Dwyer S, Abidin Z, et al. Prospective in-patient cohort study of moves between levels of therapeutic security: the DUNDRUM-1 triage security, DUNDRUM-3 programme completion and DUNDRUM-4 recovery scales and the HCR-20 BMC Psychiatry, 2012.PMID 22794187
  4. [4]Abidin Z, Davoren M, Naughton L, et al. Susceptibility (risk and protective) factors for in-patient violence and self-harm: prospective study of structured professional judgement instruments START and SAPROF, DUNDRUM-3 and DUNDRUM-4 in forensic mental health services BMC Psychiatry, 2013.PMID 23890106
  5. [5]Freestone M, Bull D, Brown R, et al. Triage, decision-making and follow-up of patients referred to a UK forensic service: validation of the DUNDRUM toolkit BMC Psychiatry, 2015.PMID 26446536
  6. [6]Chester V, Alexander RT, Morgan W. Measuring relational security in forensic mental health services BJPsych Bull, 2017.PMID 29234515
  7. [7]Siu BW, Au-Yeung CC, Chan AW, et al. Measuring the profiles of the security needs of forensic psychiatric inpatients: Validation of the See, Think, Act Scale Asia Pac Psychiatry, 2019.PMID 30378764
  8. [8]de Vries MG, Verkes RJ, Bulten BH. See think act scale: Validation of the Dutch version of a measure of relational security in high secure forensic psychiatric care Front Psychiatry, 2022.PMID 36262628
  9. [9]Völlm BA, Edworthy R, Huband N, et al. Characteristics and Pathways of Long-Stay Patients in High and Medium Secure Settings in England; A Secondary Publication From a Large Mixed-Methods Study Front Psychiatry, 2018.PMID 29713294
  10. [10]Hare Duke L, Furtado V, Guo B, et al. Long-stay in forensic-psychiatric care in the UK Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol, 2018.PMID 29387921
  11. [11]Fazel S, Fimińska Z, Cocks C, et al. Patient outcomes following discharge from secure psychiatric hospitals: systematic review and meta-analysis Br J Psychiatry, 2016.PMID 26729842
  12. [12]Wolf A, Fanshawe TR, Sariaslan A, et al. Prediction of violent crime on discharge from secure psychiatric hospitals: A clinical prediction rule (FoVOx) Eur Psychiatry, 2018.PMID 29161680
  13. [13]Jewell M, Pillai K, Cavney J, et al. Examining the need for a high level of therapeutic security at a regional forensic mental health service in Aotearoa New Zealand Psychiatr Psychol Law, 2024.PMID 38628253
  14. [14]Coid JW, Hickey N, Yang M. Comparison of outcomes following after-care from forensic and general adult psychiatric services Br J Psychiatry, 2007.PMID 17541111
  15. [15]McCullough S, Stanley C, Smith H, et al. Outcome measures of risk and recovery in Broadmoor High Secure Forensic Hospital: stratification of care pathways and moves to medium secure hospitals BJPsych Open, 2020.PMID 32684202
  16. [16]Kennedy HG, Mullaney R, McKenna P, et al. A tool to evaluate proportionality and necessity in the use of restrictive practices in forensic mental health settings: the DRILL tool (Dundrum restriction, intrusion and liberty ladders) BMC Psychiatry, 2020.PMID 33097036
  17. [17]Holley J, Weaver T, Völlm B. The experience of long stay in high and medium secure psychiatric hospitals in England: qualitative study of the patient perspective Int J Ment Health Syst, 2020.PMID 32256688
  18. [18]Adams J, Thomas SDM, Mackinnon T, et al. The risks, needs and stages of recovery of a complete forensic patient cohort in an Australian state BMC Psychiatry, 2018.PMID 29415683
  19. [19]Zagham W, Kisely S, Stedman T, et al. Factors associated with length of stay in medium secure units: A realist review Australas Psychiatry, 2024.PMID 39318046
  20. [20]Bowden J, Logan C, Robinson L, et al. Clinicians' use of the structured professional judgement approach for adult secure psychiatric service admission assessments: A systematic review PLoS One, 2024.PMID 39325743

Test yourself

Practise what you just read

  • 10 MCQs
Psychiatry Fellowship Pro

$29/ monthor $279 / year

The complete Psychiatry Fellowship library, every exam format, one subscription.

  • Complete library for one chosen specialty
  • Timed MCQ mock exams and spaced review
  • Clinical cases & cross-table vivas
See pricingSign in
PreviousTeaching and supervision skills for psychiatristsProfessional — teaching and supervision skillsNextTransition from CAMHS to adult servicesChild and adolescent psychiatry — service interface