LaMontagne Anthony D, Lockwood Christopher, Mackinnon Andrew, Henry David, Cox Laura, Hall Neil R, King Tania L
Institute for Health Transformation, Deakin University, Geelong, Australia.
Centre for Health Equity, Melbourne School of Global and Population Health, University of Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Am J Ind Med. 2025 Apr;68(4):331-343. doi: 10.1002/ajim.23698. Epub 2025 Jan 12.
The MATES in Construction suicide prevention program was adapted to the manufacturing sector and evaluated in a pilot of the program.
Ten manufacturing worksites were randomly assigned to intervention (5 sites) and wait-list control (5 sites) conditions in a two-arm cluster randomized design. 1245 workers responded at baseline (87% response rate) and 648 at final (35% response rate). Literacy of Suicide Scale (LOSS) was assessed as a process outcome, and help-seeking intentions as the primary outcome (General Help-Seeking Questionnaire [GHSQ] score). Secondary outcomes included help sought, suicidal thoughts and likelihood of suicide attempt scores, and Kessler-6 scores. Linear mixed models for repeated measures were used in intention-to-treat (ITT) and completer analyses.
All sites finished the trial, with intervention periods ranging from 8 to 11 months; however, none of the five intervention sites fully implemented the intervention as planned. ITT analyses showed an improvement in LOSS scores within the intervention group (0.49, 95% CI 0.13-0.49), but the mean difference in change between intervention and control included the null (0.34, 95% CI -0.10 to 0.80). The primary outcome of GHSQ scores also improved within the intervention group, but the difference in change included the null (mean difference 1.52, 95% CI -0.69 to 3.74). No secondary outcomes improved relative to control in ITT or completers analyses. Exploratory analysis of disaggregated GHSQ help sources showed greater improvement in mean difference in change for the main MATES message of seeking help from MATES Connectors.
The intervention, as implemented, was not effective at achieving the primary or secondary outcomes.
Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry: ACTRN 12622000122752.
建筑行业的“伙伴预防自杀”计划被改编应用于制造业，并在该计划的一项试点中进行了评估。
在一项双臂整群随机设计中，10个制造工作场所被随机分配到干预组（5个场所）和等待名单对照组（5个场所）。1245名工人在基线时做出回应（回应率87%），648名在最终阶段做出回应（回应率35%）。自杀素养量表（LOSS）被评估为一个过程结果，寻求帮助的意愿作为主要结果（一般寻求帮助问卷[GHSQ]得分）。次要结果包括寻求的帮助、自杀念头和自杀未遂可能性得分，以及凯斯勒6项量表得分。在意向性分析（ITT）和完成者分析中使用重复测量的线性混合模型。
所有场所都完成了试验，干预期从8个月到11个月不等；然而，五个干预场所中没有一个完全按计划实施干预。ITT分析显示干预组内LOSS得分有所改善（0.49，95%置信区间0.13 - 0.49），但干预组与对照组之间变化的平均差异包含无效值（0.34，95%置信区间−0.10至0.80）。干预组内GHSQ得分的主要结果也有所改善，但变化差异包含无效值（平均差异1.52，95%置信区间−0.69至3.74）。在ITT或完成者分析中，相对于对照组，次要结果均未得到改善。对GHSQ帮助来源进行的探索性分析表明，从伙伴联络人处寻求帮助这一主要“伙伴”信息在变化的平均差异方面有更大改善。
所实施的干预措施在实现主要或次要结果方面并不有效。
澳大利亚和新西兰临床试验注册中心：ACTRN 12622000122752。
