Kapur Navneet, Murphy Elizabeth, Cooper Jayne, Bergen Helen, Hawton Keith, Simkin Sue, Casey Deborah, Horrocks Judith, Lilley Rachael, Noble Rachael, Owens David
Centre for Suicide Prevention, Williamson Building, University of Manchester, Oxford Road, Manchester M13 9PL, UK.
J Affect Disord. 2008 Mar;106(3):285-93. doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2007.07.010. Epub 2007 Aug 29.
Psychosocial assessment is central to the management of self-harm, but not all individuals receive an assessment following presentation to hospital. Research exploring the factors associated with assessment and non-assessment is sparse. It is unclear how assessment relates to subsequent outcome.
We identified episodes of self-harm presenting to six hospitals in the UK cities of Oxford, Leeds, and Manchester over an 18-month period (1st March 2000 to 31st August 2001). We used established monitoring systems to investigate: the proportion of episodes resulting in a specialist assessment in each hospital; the factors associated with assessment and non-assessment; the relationship between assessment and repetition of self-harm.
A total of 7344 individuals presented with 10,498 episodes of self-harm during the study period. Overall, 60% of episodes resulted in a specialist psychosocial assessment. Factors associated with an increased likelihood of assessment included age over 55 years, current psychiatric treatment, admission to a medical ward, and ingestion of antidepressants. Factors associated with a decreased likelihood of assessment included unemployment, self-cutting, attending outside normal working hours, and self-discharge. We found no overall association between assessment and self-harm repetition, but there were differences between hospitals--assessments were protective in one hospital but associated with an increased risk of repetition in another.
Some data may have been more likely to be recorded if episodes resulted in a specialist assessment. This was a non-experimental study and so the findings relating specialist assessment to repetition should be interpreted cautiously.
Many people who harm themselves, including potentially vulnerable individuals, do not receive an adequate assessment while at hospital. Staff should be aware of the organizational and clinical factors associated with non-assessment. Identifying the active components of psychosocial assessment may help to inform future interventions for self-harm.
社会心理评估是自我伤害管理的核心,但并非所有到医院就诊的个体都会接受评估。探索与评估和未评估相关因素的研究很少。尚不清楚评估与后续结果之间的关系。
我们确定了在18个月期间(2000年3月1日至2001年8月31日)在英国牛津、利兹和曼彻斯特市的六家医院就诊的自我伤害事件。我们使用既定的监测系统进行调查:每家医院中导致进行专科评估的事件比例;与评估和未评估相关的因素;评估与自我伤害重复之间的关系。
在研究期间,共有7344名个体出现了10498次自我伤害事件。总体而言,60%的事件导致了专科社会心理评估。与评估可能性增加相关的因素包括55岁以上、当前接受精神科治疗、入住内科病房以及服用抗抑郁药。与评估可能性降低相关的因素包括失业、自我切割、在正常工作时间以外就诊以及自行出院。我们发现评估与自我伤害重复之间没有总体关联,但不同医院之间存在差异——在一家医院评估具有保护作用,而在另一家医院则与重复风险增加相关。
如果事件导致进行专科评估,一些数据可能更有可能被记录。这是一项非实验性研究,因此应谨慎解释将专科评估与重复相关联的研究结果。
许多自我伤害的人,包括潜在的弱势群体,在医院期间没有得到充分的评估。工作人员应了解与未评估相关的组织和临床因素。确定社会心理评估的有效组成部分可能有助于为未来的自我伤害干预提供信息。