Recent GP consultation before death by suicide in middle-aged males: a national consecutive case series study.

BACKGROUND: Reducing suicide risk in middle-aged males (40-54 years) is a national priority. People have often presented to their GP within 3 months before suicide thus highlighting an opportunity for early intervention. AIM: To describe the sociodemographic characteristics and identify antecedents in middle-aged males who recently consulted a GP before dying by suicide. DESIGN AND SETTING: This study was a descriptive examination of suicide in a national consecutive sample of middle-aged males in 2017 in England, Scotland, and Wales. METHOD: General population mortality data were obtained from the Office for National Statistics and National Records of Scotland. Information was collected about antecedents considered relevant to suicide from data sources. Logistic regression examined associations with final recent GP consultation. Males with lived experience were consulted during the study. RESULTS: In 2017, a quarter (n = 1516) of all suicide deaths were in middle-aged males. Data were attained on 242 males: 43% had their last GP consultation within 3 months of suicide; and a third of these males were unemployed and nearly half were living alone. Males who saw a GP recently before suicide were more likely to have had recent self-harm and work-related problems than males who had not. Having a current major physical illness, recent self-harm, presenting with a mental health problem, and recent work-related issues were associated with having a last GP consultation close to suicide. CONCLUSION: Clinical factors were identified that GPs should be alert to when assessing middle-aged males. Personalised holistic management may have a role in preventing suicide in these individuals.

Suicide risk assessment in UK mental health services: a national mixed-methods study.

BACKGROUND: Risk assessments are a central component of mental health care. Few national studies have been done in the UK on risk assessment tools used in mental health services. We aimed to examine which suicide risk assessment tools are in use in the UK; establish the views of clinicians, carers, and service users on the use of these tools; and identify how risk assessment tools have been used with mental health patients before suicide. METHODS: We did a mixed-methods study involving three components: collection and content analysis of risk assessment tools used by UK mental health services; an online survey of clinicians, service-users, and carers; and qualitative telephone interviews with clinicians on their use of risk assessment tools before a suicide death and their views of these tools. The online survey was advertised through the National Confidential Inquiry into Suicide and Safety in Mental Health's (NCISH) website and social media, and it included both quantitative and open-ended qualitative questions, and respondents were recruited through convenience sampling. For the telephone interviews, we examined the NCISH database to identify clinicians who had been responsible for the care of a patient who died by suicide and who had been viewed as being at low or no immediate risk of suicide. FINDINGS: We obtained 156 risk assessment tools from all 85 National Health Service mental health organisations in the UK, and 85 (one per each organisation) were included in the analysis. We found little consistency in use of these instruments, with 33 (39%) of 85 organisations using locally developed tools. Most tools aimed to predict self-harm or suicidal behaviour (84 [99%] of 85), and scores were used to determine management decisions (80 [94%]). Clinicians described positive aspects of risk tools (facilitating communication and enhancing therapeutic relationships) but also expressed negative views (inadequate training in the use of tools and their time-consuming nature). Both patients and carers reported some positive views, but also emphasised little involvement during risk assessment, and a lack of clarity on what to do in a crisis. INTERPRETATION: Assessment processes need to be consistent across mental health services and include adequate training on how to assess, formulate, and manage suicide risk. An emphasis on patient and carer involvement is needed. In line with national guidance, risk assessment should not be seen as a way to predict future behaviour and should not be used as a means of allocating treatment. Management plans should be personalised and collaboratively developed with patients and their families and carers. FUNDING: The Healthcare Quality Improvement Partnership.

Clinical characteristics and care pathways of patients with personality disorder who died by suicide.

BACKGROUND: It is estimated that 1 in 10 people have a personality disorder. People with emotionally unstable personality disorder are at high risk of suicide. Despite being frequent users of mental health services, there is often no clear pathway for patients to access effective treatments. AIMS: To describe the characteristics of patients with personality disorder who died by suicide, examine clinical care pathways and explore whether the care adhered to National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidance. METHOD: National consecutive case series (1 January 2013 to 31 December 2013). The study examined the health records and serious incident reports of patients with personality disorder who died by suicide in the UK. RESULTS: The majority had a diagnosis of borderline/emotionally unstable or antisocial personality disorder. A high proportion of patients had a history of self-harm (n = 146, 95%) and alcohol (n = 101, 66%) or drug misuse (n = 79, 52%). We found an extensive pattern of service contact in the year before death, with no clear pathway for patients. Care was inconsistent and there were gaps in service provision. In 99 (70%) of the 141 patients with data, the last episode of care followed a crisis. Access to specialised psychological therapies was limited; short-term in-patient admissions was adhered to; however, guidance on short-term prescribing for comorbid conditions was not followed for two-thirds of patients. CONCLUSIONS: Continuity and stability of care is required to prevent, rather than respond to individuals in crisis. A comprehensive audit of services for people with personality disorder across the UK is recommended to assess the quality of care provided.

Learning from clinicians' views of good quality practice in mental healthcare services in the context of suicide prevention: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Suicide and non-fatal self-harm represent key patient safety events in mental healthcare services. However, additional important learning can also be derived by highlighting examples of optimal practice that help to keep patients safe. In this study, we aimed to explore clinicians' views of what constitutes good practice in mental healthcare services in the context of suicide prevention. METHODS: Data were extracted from the National Confidential Inquiry into Suicide and Safety in Mental Health (NCISH) database, a consecutive case series study of suicide by people in contact with mental healthcare services. A large national sample of clinicians' responses was analysed with a hybrid thematic analysis. RESULTS: Responses (n = 2331) were submitted by clinicians across 62 mental healthcare providers. The following five themes illustrated good practice that helps to: 1) promote safer environments, 2) develop stronger relationships with patients and families, 3) provide timely access to tailored and appropriate care, 4) facilitate seamless transitions, and 5) establish a sufficiently skilled, resourced and supported staff team. CONCLUSION: This study highlighted clinicians' views on key elements of good practice in mental health services. Respondents included practice specific to mental health services that focus on enhancing patient safety via prevention of self-harm and suicide. Clinicians possess important understanding of optimal practice but there are few opportunities to share such insight on a broader scale. A further challenge is to implement optimal practice into routine, daily care to improve patient safety and reduce suicide risk.