Screening and Intervention for Suicide Prevention: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of the ED-SAFE Interventions.

OBJECTIVE: Suicide screening followed by an intervention may identify suicidal individuals and prevent recurring self-harm, but few cost-effectiveness studies have been conducted. This study sought to determine whether the increased costs of implementing screening and intervention in hospital emergency departments (EDs) are justified by improvements in patient outcomes (decreased attempts and deaths by suicide). METHODS: The Emergency Department Safety Assessment and Follow-up Evaluation (ED-SAFE) study recruited participants in eight U.S. EDs between August 2010 and November 2013. The eight sites sequentially implemented two interventions: universal screening added to treatment as usual and universal screening plus a telephone-based intervention delivered over 12 months post-ED visit. This study calculated incremental cost-effectiveness ratios and cost-effectiveness acceptability curves to evaluate screening and suicide outcome measures and costs for the two interventions relative to treatment as usual. Costs were calculated from the provider perspective (e.g., wage and salary data and rental costs for hospital space) per patient and per site. RESULTS: Average per-patient costs to a participating ED of universal screening plus intervention were $1,063 per month, approximately $500 more than universal screening added to treatment as usual. Universal screening plus intervention was more effective in preventing suicides compared with universal screening added to treatment as usual and treatment as usual alone. CONCLUSIONS: Although the choice of universal screening plus intervention depends on the value placed on the outcome by decision makers, results suggest that implementing such suicide prevention measures can lead to significant cost savings.

Suicide Prevention in an Emergency Department Population: The ED-SAFE Study.

Importance: Suicide is a leading cause of deaths in the United States. Although the emergency department (ED) is an opportune setting for initiating suicide prevention efforts, ED-initiated suicide prevention interventions remain underdeveloped. Objective: To determine whether an ED-initiated intervention reduces subsequent suicidal behavior. Design, Setting, and Participants: This multicenter study of 8 EDs in the United States enrolled adults with a recent suicide attempt or ideation and was composed of 3 sequential phases: (1) a treatment as usual (TAU) phase from August 2010 to December 2011, (2) a universal screening (screening) phase from September 2011 to December 2012, and (3) a universal screening plus intervention (intervention) phase from July 2012 to November 2013. Interventions: Screening consisted of universal suicide risk screening. The intervention phase consisted of universal screening plus an intervention, which included secondary suicide risk screening by the ED physician, discharge resources, and post-ED telephone calls focused on reducing suicide risk. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was suicide attempts (nonfatal and fatal) over the 52-week follow-up period. The proportion and total number of attempts were analyzed. Results: A total of 1376 participants were recruited, including 769 females (55.9%) with a median (interquartile range) age of 37 (26-47) years. A total of 288 participants (20.9%) made at least 1 suicide attempt, and there were 548 total suicide attempts among participants. There were no significant differences in risk reduction between the TAU and screening phases (23% vs 22%, respectively). However, compared with the TAU phase, patients in the intervention phase showed a 5% absolute reduction in suicide attempt risk (23% vs 18%), with a relative risk reduction of 20%. Participants in the intervention phase had 30% fewer total suicide attempts than participants in the TAU phase. Negative binomial regression analysis indicated that the participants in the intervention phase had significantly fewer total suicide attempts than participants in the TAU phase (incidence rate ratio, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.52-1.00; P = .05) but no differences between the TAU and screening phases (incidence rate ratio, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.71-1.41; P = .99). Conclusions and Relevance: Among at-risk patients in the ED, a combination of brief interventions administered both during and after the ED visit decreased post-ED suicidal behavior.

Factors Associated With Suicide Outcomes 12 Months After Screening Positive for Suicide Risk in the Emergency Department.

OBJECTIVE: The main objective was to identify which patient characteristics have the strongest association with suicide outcomes in the 12 months after an index emergency department (ED) visit. METHODS: Data were analyzed from the first two phases of the Emergency Department Safety Assessment and Follow-up Evaluation (ED-SAFE). The ED-SAFE study, a quasi-experimental, interrupted time-series design, involved participation from eight general medical EDs across the United States. Participants included adults presenting to the ED with active suicidal ideation or an attempt in the past week. Data collection included baseline interview; six- and 12-month chart reviews; and six-, 12-, 24-, 36-, and 52-week telephone follow-up assessments. Regression analyses were conducted. RESULTS: Among 874 participants, the median age was 37 years (interquartile range 27-47), with 56% of the sample being female (N=488), 74% white (N=649), and 13% Hispanic (N=113). At baseline, 577 (66%) participants had suicidal ideation only, whereas 297 (34%) had a suicide attempt in the past week. Data sufficient to determine outcomes were available for 782 (90%). In the 12 months after the index ED visit, 195 (25%) had documentation of at least one suicide attempt or suicide. High school education or less, an ED visit in the preceding six months, prior nonsuicidal self-injury, current alcohol misuse, and suicidal intent or plan were predictive of future suicidal behavior. CONCLUSIONS: Continuing to build an understanding of the factors associated with future suicidal behaviors for this population will help guide design and implementation of improved suicide screening and interventions in the ED and better allocation of scarce resources.

Improving Suicide Risk Screening and Detection in the Emergency Department.

INTRODUCTION: The Emergency Department Safety Assessment and Follow-up Evaluation Screening Outcome Evaluation examined whether universal suicide risk screening is feasible and effective at improving suicide risk detection in the emergency department (ED). METHODS: A three-phase interrupted time series design was used: Treatment as Usual (Phase 1), Universal Screening (Phase 2), and Universal Screening + Intervention (Phase 3). Eight EDs from seven states participated from 2009 through 2014. Data collection spanned peak hours and 7 days of the week. Chart reviews established if screening for intentional self-harm ideation/behavior (screening) was documented in the medical record and whether the individual endorsed intentional self-harm ideation/behavior (detection). Patient interviews determined if the documented intentional self-harm was suicidal. In Phase 2, universal suicide risk screening was implemented during routine care. In Phase 3, improvements were made to increase screening rates and fidelity. Chi-square tests and generalized estimating equations were calculated. Data were analyzed in 2014. RESULTS: Across the three phases (N=236,791 ED visit records), documented screenings rose from 26% (Phase 1) to 84% (Phase 3) (χ(2) [2, n=236,789]=71,000, p<0.001). Detection rose from 2.9% to 5.7% (χ(2) [2, n=236,789]=902, p<0.001). The majority of detected intentional self-harm was confirmed as recent suicidal ideation or behavior by patient interview. CONCLUSIONS: Universal suicide risk screening in the ED was feasible and led to a nearly twofold increase in risk detection. If these findings remain true when scaled, the public health impact could be tremendous, because identification of risk is the first and necessary step for preventing suicide. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Emergency Department Safety Assessmentand Follow-up Evaluation (ED-SAFE) ClinicalTrials.gov: (NCT01150994). https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01150994?term=ED-SAFE&rank=1.

Change in emergency department providers' beliefs and practices after use of new protocols for suicidal patients.

OBJECTIVE: The study examined changes in self-reported attitudes and practices related to suicide risk assessment among providers at emergency departments (EDs) during a three-phase quasi-experimental trial involving implementation of ED protocols for suicidal patients. METHODS: A total of 1,289 of 1,828 (71% response rate) eligible providers at eight EDs completed a voluntary, anonymous survey at baseline, after introduction of universal suicide screening, and after introduction of suicide prevention resources (nurses) and a secondary risk assessment tool (physicians). RESULTS: Among participants, the median age was 40 years old, 64% were female, and there were no demographic differences across study phases; 68% were nurses, and 32% were attending physicians. Between phase 1 and phase 3, increasing proportions of nurses reported screening for suicide (36% and 95%, respectively, p<.001) and increasing proportions of physicians reported further assessment of suicide risk (63% and 80%, respectively, p<.01). Although increasing proportions of providers said universal screening would result in more psychiatric consultations, decreasing proportions said it would slow down clinical care. Increasing proportions of nurses reported often or almost always asking suicidal patients about firearm access (18%-69%, depending on the case), although these numbers remained low relative to ideal practice. Between 35% and 87% of physicians asked about firearms, depending on the case, and these percentages did not change significantly over the study phases. CONCLUSIONS: These findings support the feasibility of implementing universal screening for suicide in EDs, assuming adequate resources, but providers should be educated to ask suicidal patients about firearm access.

The Emergency Department Safety Assessment and Follow-up Evaluation (ED-SAFE): method and design considerations.

BACKGROUND: Due to the concentration of individuals at-risk for suicide, an emergency department visit represents an opportune time for suicide risk screening and intervention. PURPOSE: The Emergency Department Safety Assessment and Follow-up Evaluation (ED-SAFE) uses a quasi-experimental, interrupted time series design to evaluate whether (1) a practical approach to universally screening ED patients for suicide risk leads to improved detection of suicide risk and (2) a multi-component intervention delivered during and after the ED visit improves suicide-related outcomes. METHODS: This paper summarizes the ED-SAFE's study design and methods within the context of considerations relevant to effectiveness research in suicide prevention and pertinent human participants concerns. 1440 suicidal individuals, from 8 general ED's nationally will be enrolled during three sequential phases of data collection (480 individuals/phase): (1) Treatment as Usual; (2) Universal Screening; and (3) Intervention. Data from the three phases will inform two separate evaluations: Screening Outcome (Phases 1 and 2) and Intervention (Phases 2 and 3). Individuals will be followed for 12 months. The primary study outcome is a composite reflecting completed suicide, attempted suicide, aborted or interrupted attempts, and implementation of rescue procedures during an outcome assessment. CONCLUSIONS: While 'classic' randomized control trials (RCT) are typically selected over quasi-experimental designs, ethical and methodological issues may make an RCT a poor fit for complex interventions in an applied setting, such as the ED. ED-SAFE represents an innovative approach to examining the complex public health issue of suicide prevention through a multi-phase, quasi-experimental design embedded in 'real world' clinical settings.

Knowledge, attitudes, and practices of emergency department providers in the care of suicidal patients.

BACKGROUND: We sought to examine the knowledge, attitudes, and practices of emergency department (ED) providers concerning suicidal patient care and to identify characteristics associated with screening for suicidal ideation (SI). METHODS: Six hundred thirty-one providers at eight EDs completed a voluntary, anonymous survey (79% response rate). RESULTS: The median participant age was 35 (interquartile range: 30-44) years and 57% of the participants were females. Half (48%) were nurses and half were attending (22%) or resident (30%) physicians. More expressed confidence in SI screening skills (81-91%) than in skills to assess risk severity (64-70%), counsel patients (46-56%), or create safety plans (23-40%), with some differences between providers. Few thought mental health provider staffing was almost always sufficient (6-20%) or that suicidal patient treatment was almost always a top ED priority (15-21%). More nurses (37%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 31-42%) than physicians (7%, 95% CI 4-10%) reported screening most or all patients for SI; this difference persisted after multivariable adjustment. In multivariable analysis, other factors associated with screening most or all patients for SI were self-confidence in skills, (odds ratio [OR] 1.60, 95% CI 1.17-2.18), feeling that suicidal patient care was a top ED priority (OR 1.73, 95% CI 1.11-2.69) and 5+ postgraduate years of clinical experience (OR 2.06, 95% CI 1.03-4.13). CONCLUSIONS: ED providers reported confidence in suicide screening skills but gaps in further assessment, counseling, or referral skills. Efforts to promote better identification of suicidal patients should be accompanied by a commensurate effort to improve risk assessment and management skills, along with improved access to mental health specialists.