Limits...
Recent self-harm and psychological measures in the emergency department.

Randall JR, Rowe BH, Dong KA, Colman I - PeerJ (2014)

Bottom Line: A study was conducted where 181 suicidal patients were enrolled in two EDs within the city of Edmonton, Canada.The results of these measures were compared between those who presented to the ED with self-harm and those who presented only with ideation.Possible explanations for this difference include differences in psychological traits between the two groups and possible cathartic effects of self-harm.

View Article: PubMed Central - HTML - PubMed

Affiliation: School of Public Health, University of Alberta , Edmonton , Canada ; Department of Community Health Sciences, College of Medicine, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Manitoba , Winnipeg , Canada.

ABSTRACT
The assessment of self-harm risk is a common, difficult, and perplexing task for many physicians, especially those working in emergency departments (ED). Attempts have been made to determine objective methods for assessing patients with suicidal ideation or self-harm though there is still a lack of knowledge about objective assessments of these patients. A study was conducted where 181 suicidal patients were enrolled in two EDs within the city of Edmonton, Canada. Initial interviews were conducted in the ED which collected basic demographics and medical history as well as psychometric measures including the Beck Hopelessness Scale, Barratt Impulsiveness Scale, Brief Symptom Inventory, Drug Abuse Screening Test 10, and CAGE questionnaire. The results of these measures were compared between those who presented to the ED with self-harm and those who presented only with ideation. Those with recent self-harm scored lower on many of the scales and subscales of distress and impulsivity measured compared to those with no recent self-harm. Possible explanations for this difference include differences in psychological traits between the two groups and possible cathartic effects of self-harm. The lower scores obtained by those that present with self-harm may complicate attempts to use psychometric tools to determine future self-harm risk.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

Distress level of patients.Self-harm group versus ideation only group.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4230549&req=5

fig-1: Distress level of patients.Self-harm group versus ideation only group.

Mentions: The post-hoc analysis revealed a decrease in distress over the first hours in the ED for those that had engaged in self-harm (Fig. 1). However this trend was not significant. There was no apparent trend in the level of distress for patients that presented with ideation only. The regression analysis found no evidence that the result is due to confounding from extraneous variables. Entering the other potentially relevant variables not only failed to decrease the strength of the noted association between the questionnaires and recent self-harm but instead increased the strength of the relationship slightly. A similar pattern occurred when the individual scales were regressed instead of the aggregate measure of distress.


Recent self-harm and psychological measures in the emergency department.

Randall JR, Rowe BH, Dong KA, Colman I - PeerJ (2014)

Distress level of patients.Self-harm group versus ideation only group.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4230549&req=5

fig-1: Distress level of patients.Self-harm group versus ideation only group.
Mentions: The post-hoc analysis revealed a decrease in distress over the first hours in the ED for those that had engaged in self-harm (Fig. 1). However this trend was not significant. There was no apparent trend in the level of distress for patients that presented with ideation only. The regression analysis found no evidence that the result is due to confounding from extraneous variables. Entering the other potentially relevant variables not only failed to decrease the strength of the noted association between the questionnaires and recent self-harm but instead increased the strength of the relationship slightly. A similar pattern occurred when the individual scales were regressed instead of the aggregate measure of distress.

Bottom Line: A study was conducted where 181 suicidal patients were enrolled in two EDs within the city of Edmonton, Canada.The results of these measures were compared between those who presented to the ED with self-harm and those who presented only with ideation.Possible explanations for this difference include differences in psychological traits between the two groups and possible cathartic effects of self-harm.

View Article: PubMed Central - HTML - PubMed

Affiliation: School of Public Health, University of Alberta , Edmonton , Canada ; Department of Community Health Sciences, College of Medicine, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Manitoba , Winnipeg , Canada.

ABSTRACT
The assessment of self-harm risk is a common, difficult, and perplexing task for many physicians, especially those working in emergency departments (ED). Attempts have been made to determine objective methods for assessing patients with suicidal ideation or self-harm though there is still a lack of knowledge about objective assessments of these patients. A study was conducted where 181 suicidal patients were enrolled in two EDs within the city of Edmonton, Canada. Initial interviews were conducted in the ED which collected basic demographics and medical history as well as psychometric measures including the Beck Hopelessness Scale, Barratt Impulsiveness Scale, Brief Symptom Inventory, Drug Abuse Screening Test 10, and CAGE questionnaire. The results of these measures were compared between those who presented to the ED with self-harm and those who presented only with ideation. Those with recent self-harm scored lower on many of the scales and subscales of distress and impulsivity measured compared to those with no recent self-harm. Possible explanations for this difference include differences in psychological traits between the two groups and possible cathartic effects of self-harm. The lower scores obtained by those that present with self-harm may complicate attempts to use psychometric tools to determine future self-harm risk.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus