Hospital care and repetition following self-harm: multicentre comparison of self-poisoning and self-injury.

BACKGROUND: Quantitative research about self-harm largely deals with self-poisoning, despite the high incidence of self-injury. AIMS: We compared patterns of hospital care and repetition associated with self-poisoning and self-injury. METHOD: Demographic and clinical data were collected in a multicentre, prospective cohort study, involving 10,498 consecutive episodes of self-harm at six English teaching hospitals. RESULTS: Compared with those who self-poisoned, people who cut themselves were more likely to have self-harmed previously and to have received support from mental health services, but they were far less likely to be admitted to the general hospital or receive a psychosocial assessment. Although only 17% of people repeated self-harm during the 18 months of study, survival analysis that takes account of all episodes revealed a repetition rate of 33% in the year following an episode: 47% after episodes of self-cutting and 31% after self-poisoning (P<0.001). Of those who repeated, a third switched method of self-harm. CONCLUSIONS: Hospital services offer less to people who have cut themselves, although they are far more likely to repeat, than to those who have self-poisoned. Attendance at hospital should result in psychosocial assessment of needs regardless of method of self-harm.

Psychosocial assessment following self-harm: results from the multi-centre monitoring of self-harm project.

BACKGROUND: 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. METHODS: 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. RESULTS: 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. LIMITATIONS: 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. CONCLUSION: 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.

The effect of using NHS number as the unique identifier for patients who self-harm: a multi-centre descriptive study.

BACKGROUND: Processing personal data for research purposes and the requirement of anonymity has been the subject of recent debate. We aimed to determine the proportion of individuals who present to emergency departments with non-fatal suicidal behavior where an NHS number has been successfully traced and to investigate the characteristics of patients associated with non-capture. METHOD: This was a descriptive study of people attending after self-harm using allocation of NHS numbers as main outcome measurement. Data from the Multicentre Monitoring of Self-Harm Project from 3 centres in England were used to identify consecutive patients (N = 3000) who were treated in six emergency departments in Oxford, Manchester and Leeds in 2004 and 2005 following self-harm. RESULTS: NHS number was available between 55-73% of individuals across centres. Characteristics associated with non-recording of NHS number in more than one centre included those from ethnic minority groups (Oxford: chi-squared statistic = 13.6, df = 3, p = 0.004; Manchester: chi-squared statistic = 13.6, df = 3, p

Self-harm in England: a tale of three cities. Multicentre study of self-harm.

BACKGROUND: Self-harm is a major healthcare problem in the United Kingdom, but monitoring of hospital presentations has largely been done separately in single centres. Multicentre monitoring of self-harm has been established as a result of the National Suicide Prevention Strategy for England. METHOD: Data on self-harm presentations to general hospitals in Oxford (one hospital), Manchester (three hospitals) and Leeds (two hospitals), collected through monitoring systems in each centre, were analysed for the 18-month period March 2000 to August 2001. RESULTS: The findings were based on 7344 persons who presented following 10,498 episodes of self-harm. Gender and age patterns were similar in the three centres, 57.0% of patients being female and two-thirds (62.9%) under 35 years of age. The largest numbers by age groups were 15-19 year-old females and 20-24 year-old males. The female to male ratio decreased with age. Rates of self-harm were higher in Manchester than Oxford or Leeds, in keeping with local suicide rates. The proportion of patients receiving a specialist psychosocial assessment varied between centres and was strongly associated with admission to the general hospital. Approximately 80% of self-harm involved self-poisoning. Overdoses of paracetamol, the most frequent method, were more common in younger age groups, antidepressants in middle age groups, and benzodiazepines and sedatives in older age groups. Alcohol was involved in more than half (54.9%) of assessed episodes. The most common time of presentation to hospital was between 10 pm and 2 am. CONCLUSIONS: Multicentre monitoring of self-harm in England has demonstrated similar overall patterns of self-harm in Oxford, Manchester and Leeds, with some differences reflecting local suicide rates. Diurnal variation in time of presentation to hospital and the need for assessment of non-admitted patients have implications for service provision.

Transforming between Beck Depression Inventory and CORE-OM scores in routine clinical practice.

OBJECTIVES: The Clinical Outcomes in Routine Evaluation - Outcome Measure (CORE-OM) and the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI) are routinely used to assess emotional problems. It would be helpful to be able to compare scores when only one of the measures is available. We investigated the relationship between the measures and produced translation tables. METHODS: Level of agreement between CORE-OM and BDI-I was assessed for 2,234 clients who had completed both measures at referral for routine secondary care. Tables for predicting between the measures were constructed using several methods, including non-linear regression and non-parametric smoothing. Results were cross-validated on a separate sample of 326 clients. RESULTS: High correlations between the measures were obtained (r=.862 for female clients; r=.855 for male clients). Accuracy in predicting caseness is higher than predicting depression levels. CONCLUSIONS: CORE-OM and BDI can be compared in routine clinical settings with acceptable accuracy.

Predicting change for individual psychotherapy clients on the basis of their nearest neighbors.

This study extended client-focused research by using the nearest neighbor (NN) approach, a client-specific sampling and prediction strategy derived from research on alpine avalanches. Psychotherapy clients (N=203) seen in routine practice settings in the United Kingdom completed a battery of intake measures and then completed symptom intensity ratings before each session. Forecasts of each client's rate of change and session-by-session variability were computed on the basis of that client's NNs (n=10-50 in different comparisons). Alternative forecasts used linear or log-linear slopes and were compared with an alternative prediction strategy. Results showed that the NN approach was superior to the alternative model in predicting rate of change, though the advantage was less clear for predicting variability.