The Acceptability and Feasibility of an ED-based, Peer-delivered, Suicide Safety Planning Intervention
试验速览
- 阶段
- 不适用
- 状态
- 已完成
- 入组人数
- 37
- 试验地点
- 2
- 主要终点
- Quality of Safety Plans
研究概览
简要总结
Safety planning is a brief, ED-feasible intervention which has been demonstrated to save lives, and has been universally recommended by every recent expert consensus panel on suicide prevention strategies. In one popular version of the safety plan developed by Stanley et al, the patient is encouraged to write out the following items: identifying personal signs of a crisis; helpful internal coping strategies; social contacts or settings which may distract from a crisis; using family members or friends for help when in crisis; mental health professionals who can be contacted when in crisis; and restricting access to lethal means. In most emergency departments, safety-planning is done by clinical personnel such as psychologists or social workers, but these providers are often too busy to perform safety-planning well or have multiple other patient care responsibilities.
This study aims to find out if ED patients prefer to complete a safety plan with a peer supporter or clinical personnel. People who are visiting the emergency department for thoughts of self-harm will be asked to participate.
详细描述
This project aims to answer the following three research questions: (1) In general, do ED patients with suicidal ideation/attempt prefer to interact with/receive support from peers with life experiences of suicide or clinical professionals who might have such life experiences or not? (2) Will patients with suicidal ideation/attempt accept a peer-delivered safety planning intervention as opposed to one delivered by clinical personnel? (3) Are peer-delivered safety plans of equal quality as those delivered by clinical personnel?
研究设计
- 研究类型
- Interventional
- 分配方式
- Randomized
- 干预模型
- Parallel
- 主要目的
- Prevention
- 盲法
- None
入排标准
- 年龄范围
- 18 Years 至 89 Years（Adult, Older Adult）
- 性别
- All
- 接受健康志愿者
- 否
入选标准
- •Patients presenting for suicidal ideation (SI) or after a suicide attempt to the University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences (UAMS) Emergency Department (ED)
- •Willingness to engage in safety planning with trained non-clinical staff
- •English-speaking and English-writing (as translators will not be available for this study)
排除标准
- •<18 or >89 years of age
- •Patients appearing critically-ill
- •Incarcerated or in police custody
- •Currently intoxicated with alcohol or other substance
- •ED staff objection to patient enrollment in study
- •Unwilling or unable to complete the safety plan with a peer supporter
- •Unwilling or unable to show the safety plan to clinical staff
结局指标
主要结局
Quality of Safety Plans
时间窗: Up to 12 hours
Evaluate the quality of the completed safety plans. This will be done by retrospective review after the patient has left the ED. Safety plans will be graded individually, then resolved by consensus, for quality (0=blank, 1=boilerplate, 2=some evidence of personalization, 3=highly personalized; range=0-24) by the investigators using materials developed by Brown and Stanley for this purpose. Using a "safety checklist," responses for each of the 6 safety plan steps will be classified according to the personalization of the information in each step.
Number of Suicidal Ideology (SI) Participants Who Agree to Receive a Safety Plan
时间窗: approach in the ED (typically <1 hour)
Evaluate the number of suicidal ideology (SI) patients approached in the ED who agree to receive a safety plan.
Proportion of Eligible Patients
时间窗: Up to 12 hours
Evaluate the proportion of patients approached who meet all inclusion/exclusion criteria.
Satisfaction With Safety Planning
时间窗: Up to 12 hours
Evaluate patient satisfaction with safety planning. This will be assessed by having the patient rate their experience with the safety planning process on a 7-point Likert scale (1 - strongly disagree; 2 - disagree; 3 - moderately disagree; 4 - neutral; 5 - moderately agree; 6 - agree; 7 - strongly agree). A Likert scale measures how much someone disagrees or agrees with a particular statement.
次要结局
未报告次要终点