European Psychiatry - Volume 41 - April 2017

594 / 916

S590 25th European Congress of Psychiatry / European Psychiatry 41S (2017) S583–S644
sidered as cases. A drawwas performed to create the control group.
Both groups were matched according to their first offences’ types
as well as to their ages. A multivariate analysis was performed.
Results We included 25 cases and 38 controls. Eight recidivism
risk factors were identified. Living in urban poor neighbour-
hoods (P = 0.039; OR = 1.23), having been unemployed (P = 0.047;
OR = 1.22) and not having livedwith the family (P = 0.039; OR = 1.36)
after discharge were considered as risk factors. The same applied to
alcohol ( P = 0.032; OR = 1.29) and cannabis use disorders ( P = 0.005;
OR = 1.34). A hospitalization shorter than 6 months increased the
risk by 1.44 (P = 0.039). A combination of conventional antipsy-
chotics (P = 0.003; OR = 1.36) and a poor adherence (P = 0.006;
OR = 1.36) were considered as recidivism risk factors too.
Conclusions All eight recidivism risk factors are dynamic. This
makes recidivism prevention conceivable. Measures involving the
patient, the health care system, patients’ families, society and the
government should be taken.
Disclosure of interest The authors have not supplied their decla-
ration of competing interest.
EV0571
Predicting offense recidivism in
Schizophrenia patients
B. Oueslati ∗, R. Ridha , A. Mrabet
1 Razi Hospital, Forensic psychiatry department, Manouba, Tunisia
2 Faculty of Medicine of Tunis, Preventive medicine department,
Tunis, Tunisia
∗ Corresponding author.
Introduction Schizophrenia increases the risk of offending.
Recidivism rates are significant.
Aim Identifying general and violent recidivism risk factors in
schizophrenia patients.
Methods We conducted a case control study. All included
patients were admitted, at least once, to the forensic psychia-
try department in Razi Hospital between January 1st, 1985 and
December 31st, 2014 after a decision of irresponsibility by reason
of insanity. All those who reoffended during this period were con-
sidered as cases. A drawwas performed to create the control group.
Both groups were matched according to their first offenses’ types
as well as to their ages. A multivariate analysis was performed.
Results We included 25 cases and 38 controls. Eight recidivism
risk factors were identified. Living in urban poor neighbour-
hoods (P = 0.023; OR = 4.86), having been unemployed (P = 0.042;
OR = 2.18) and not having livedwith the family (P = 0.039; OR = 1.36)
after discharge were considered as risk factors. The same applied to
alcohol ( P = 0.026; OR = 4.89) and cannabis use disorders ( P = 0.018;
OR = 6.01). A hospitalization shorter than 6 months increased the
risk by 1.79 (P = 0.046). A combination of conventional antipsy-
chotics (P = 0.023;OR = 4.81) and a poor adherence (P = 0.001;
OR = 10.42) were considered as recidivism risk factors too.
Conclusions All eight recidivism risk factors are dynamic. This
makes recidivism prevention conceivable. Measures involving the
patient, the health care system, patients’ families, society and the
government should be taken.
Disclosure of interest The authors have not supplied their decla-
ration of competing interest.
EV0572
Decision making in structure of
self-regulation of persons with mental
disorders at assessment of capacity
Y. Perepravina
The Serbsky State Scientific Center for Social and Forensic Psychiatry,
Laboratory of Psychology, Moscow, Russia
The paper is based on the conception of Luria’s neuropsychologi-
cal theory, the conception of self-regulation (Nikolaeva V.V.), the
model of decision making (Kornilova T.V.), methodological basis
of psychological and psychiatric assessment of capacity of The
Serbsky State Scientific Center for Social and Forensic Psychiatry
(Kharitonova N.K.).
Research goal To study neuropsychological factors in persons
with mental disorders who are involves in forensic assessment
of capacity and find out correlation between decision-making and
neuropsychological factors.
Research subject The three levels of self-regulation (the level of
regulation of mental status, the operational level, the motivational
level) and the role of decision making in this structure in persons
with mental disorders who are involves in forensic assessment of
capacity.
The research methods Neuropsychological methods by Luria A.R.,
patopsychological methods for assessment Higher Psychological
Functions (Zeigarnik B.V.), Melbourne decision making question-
naire (a Russian adaptation, Kornilova T.V.).
According to Luria’s neuropsychological theory, series of the basic
neuropsychological methods include: (1) determine arithmetic
task using an algorithm, (2) tests for study of praxis and gnosis,
(3) tests for study of memory and attention, (4) test for study of
comprehension of logical-grammatic expressions.
Results – The three levels of self-regulation correspond to the
three functional brain’s areas (according to Luria’s neuropsycholo-
gical theory)
– Decision making correlation with factors of the third brain‘s area
(the frontal lobe)
The conclusions Our research considers neuropsychological fac-
tors like possible medical criterion for assessment of capacity.
Disclosure of interest The author has not supplied his/her decla-
ration of competing interest.
EV0573
Spitefulness and psychopathy:
A contribution for an Italian
adaptation
C. Garofalo , G. Rogier ∗, P. Velotti
1 Tilburg University, Department of Developmental Psychology,
Tilburg, The Netherlands
2 La Sapienza, Psicologia clinica e dinamica, Roma, Italy
3 University of Genoa, Educational Sciences, Psychology Unit, Genoa,
Italy
∗ Corresponding author.
Introduction Psychopathy has been individuated as an important
predictor of criminal recidivism. As a consequence, a growing num-
ber of studies has examined factors associated with psychopathic
traits in criminal population. While spitefulness has been associ-
ated with a range of destructive behaviors, there is a paucity of
instruments that evaluate the spitefulness (Marcus & Zeigler-Hill,
2015).
Objective Testing the validity and reliability of an Italian version
of the Spitefulness Scale.
Aims Correlate Spitefulness Scale scores and other indices of psy-
chological functioning. We recruited an offenders sample (n = 400)
and a community sample (n = 400). We administered the Spiteful-
ness Scale (Marcus, 2014), alongwith the followingmeasures: Dirty
Dozen (Carmines & Zeller, 1979), Aggression Questionnaire (Buss
& Perry, 1992), Difficulties in Emotion Regulation Scale (Gratz &
Roemer, 2004), and SRP (Hare, 1980).
Results Offenders participants showed higher levels of spiteful-
ness. Further, the construct validity of the scale was confirmed by
associations with measures of psychopathy, emotion dysregula-
tion, and interpersonal problems.