scholarly journals Effect of assertive outreach after suicide attempt in the AID (assertive intervention for deliberate self harm) trial: randomised controlled trial

BMJ ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 345 (aug22 1) ◽  
pp. e4972-e4972 ◽  
Author(s):  
B. Morthorst ◽  
J. Krogh ◽  
A. Erlangsen ◽  
F. Alberdi ◽  
M. Nordentoft
Keyword(s):  
Randomised Controlled Trial ◽  
Suicide Attempt ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Deliberate Self Harm ◽  
Assertive Outreach ◽  
Self Harm ◽  
Randomised Controlled

scholarly journals Postcard intervention for repeat self-harm: randomised controlled trial

2010 ◽  
Vol 197 (1) ◽  
pp. 55-60 ◽  
Author(s):  
Annette L. Beautrais ◽  
Sheree J. Gibb ◽  
Alan Faulkner ◽  
David M. Fergusson ◽  
Roger T. Mulder
Keyword(s):  
Emergency Department ◽  
New Zealand ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trial ◽  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Suicidal Behaviour ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Elevated Risk ◽  
Emergency Department Presentation ◽  
Self Harm ◽  
Randomised Controlled

BackgroundSelf-harm and suicidal behaviour are common reasons for emergency department presentation. Those who present with self-harm have an elevated risk of further suicidal behaviour and death.AimsTo examine whether a postcard intervention reduces self-harm re-presentations in individuals presenting to the emergency department.MethodRandomised controlled trial conducted in Christchurch, New Zealand. The intervention consisted of six postcards mailed during the 12 months following an index emergency department attendance for self-harm. Outcome measures were the proportion of participants re-presenting with self-harm and the number of re-presentations for self-harm in the 12 months following the initial presentation.ResultsAfter adjustment for prior self-harm, there were no significant differences between the control and intervention groups in the proportion of participants re-presenting with self-harm or in the total number of re-presentations for self-harm.ConclusionsThe postcard intervention did not reduce further self-harm. Together with previous results this finding suggests that the postcard intervention may be effective only for selected subgroups.

scholarly journals Acceptability and feasibility pilot randomised controlled trial of medical skin camouflage for recovery of women prisoners with self-harm scarring (COVER): the study protocol

BMJ Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. e021891
Author(s):  
Heather Mitchell ◽  
Kathryn M Abel ◽  
Brendan James Dunlop ◽  
Tammi Walker ◽  
Sandeep Ranote ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Randomised Controlled Trial ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Self Esteem ◽  
Health Concern ◽  
Women Prisoners ◽  
Pilot Randomised Controlled Trial ◽  
North East ◽  
Self Harm ◽  
Randomised Controlled

IntroductionSelf-harm in prison is a major public health concern. Less than 5% of UK prisoners are women, but they carry out more than a fifth of prison self-harm. Scars resulting from self-harm can be traumatising and stigmatising, yet there has been little focus on recovery of women prisoners with self-harm scarring. Medical skin camouflage (MSC) clinics treat individuals with disfiguring skin conditions, with evidence of improved well-being, self-esteem and social interactions. Only one community study has piloted the use of MSC for self-harm scarring.Methods and analysisWe describe an acceptability and feasibility pilot randomised controlled trial; the first to examine MSC for women prisoners who self-harm. We aim to randomise 20–25 women prisoners to a 6-week MSC intervention and 20–25 to a waitlist control (to receive the MSC after the study period). We aim to train at least 6–10 long-term prisoners with personal experience of self-harm to deliver the intervention. Before and after intervention, we will pilot collection of women-centred outcomes, including quality of life, well-being and self-esteem. We will pilot collection of self-harm incidents during the intervention, resources used to manage/treat self-harm and follow-up of women at 12 weeks from baseline. Data on recruitment, retention and dropout will be recorded. We aim for the acceptability of the intervention to prison staff and women prisoners to be explored in qualitative interviews and focus groups.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval for COVER has been granted by the North East–York Research Ethics Committee (REC) for phases 1 and 2 (reference: 16/NE/0030) and West of Scotland REC 3 for phases 3 and 4 (reference: 16/WS/0155). Informed consent will be the primary consideration; it will be made clear that participation will have no effect on life in prison or eligibility for parole. Due to the nature of the study, disclosures of serious self-harm may need to be reported to prison officials. We aim for findings to be disseminated via events at the study prison, presentations at national/international conferences, journal publications, prison governor meetings and university/National Health Service trust communications.Trial registration numberNCT02638974; Pre-results.

scholarly journals Problem-solving therapy for people who present to hospital with self-harm: Zelen randomised controlled trial

2011 ◽  
Vol 199 (4) ◽  
pp. 310-316 ◽  
Author(s):  
Simon Hatcher ◽  
Cynthia Sharon ◽  
Varsha Parag ◽  
Nicola Collins
Keyword(s):  
Problem Solving ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trial ◽  
Usual Care ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Effective Intervention ◽  
Number Needed To Treat ◽  
Problem Solving Therapy ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Self Harm ◽  
Randomised Controlled

BackgroundPresentations to hospital with self-harm are common, associated with suicide and have an increased mortality, yet there is no accepted effective intervention.AimsTo investigate whether problem-solving therapy would improve outcomes in adults presenting to hospital with self-harm, compared with usual care.MethodA Zelen randomised controlled trial was conducted in four district health boards in New Zealand. A second hospital presentation with self-harm at 1 year for all episodes, plus separate comparisons of first-time and repeat presentations at the index episode, were the a priori primary outcomes. The trial registration number was ACTRN12605000337673.ResultsIn an intention-to-treat analysis of all randomised patients (n = 1094) there was no significant difference at 12 months in the proportion of people who had presented again with self-harm when comparing all episodes (intervention 13.4%, usual care 14.1%; relative risk reduction RR = 0.05, 95% CI −0.28 to 0.30, P = 0.79) or where the index episode was the first episode (intervention 13.4%, usual care 9.4%, RR =–0.42, 95% CI −1.17 to 0.08, P = 0.37). Where the index episode was repeated self-harm, those who received therapy were less likely to present again with self-harm (intervention 13.5%, usual care 22.1%, RR = 0.39, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.60, number needed to treat 12, P = 0.03).ConclusionsProblem-solving therapy is not recommended for everyone who presents to hospital with self-harm. Among adults with a history of self-harm it may be an effective intervention.

scholarly journals Beating Adolescent Self-Harm (BASH): a randomised controlled trial comparing usual care versus usual care plus a smartphone self-harm prevention app (BlueIce) in young adolescents aged 12–17 who self-harm: study protocol

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (11) ◽  
pp. e049859
Author(s):  
Isobel Greenhalgh ◽  
Jessica Tingley ◽  
Gordon Taylor ◽  
Antonieta Medina-Lara ◽  
Shelley Rhodes ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Randomised Controlled Trial ◽  
Young People ◽  
Health Service ◽  
Usual Care ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
South Central ◽  
History Of ◽  
Self Harm ◽  
Randomised Controlled ◽  
Utilisation Data

IntroductionA mobile app, BlueIce, was codesigned with young people with a history of self-harm to provide them with more accessible and available evidence-based support at times of distress. A preliminary evaluation found that BlueIce was acceptable, safe and used by young people and helped to reduce self-harm. The present study is designed to assess the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of adding BlueIce to usual Child and Adolescent Mental Health Service (CAMHS).Methods and analysisThis study is a single-blind, randomised controlled trial comparing usual CAMHS care with usual care plus BlueIce. A total of 138 adolescents aged 12–17 with current or a history of self-harm will be recruited through the Oxford Health National Health Service (NHS) Foundation Trust via their CAMHS clinician. The primary outcome is self-harm at 12 weeks assessed using the Risk Taking and Self-Harm Inventory for Adolescents. Secondary outcomes include mood, anxiety, hopelessness, general behaviour, sleep and impact on everyday life at 12 weeks and 6 months. Health-related quality of life and healthcare resource utilisation data will be collected at baseline, 12 weeks and 6 months. Postuse interviews at 12 weeks will determine the acceptability, safety and usability of BlueIce.Ethics and disseminationThe study was approved by the NHS South Central—Oxford B NHS Research Ethics Committee (19/SC/0212) and by the Health Research Authority (HRA) and Health and Care Research Wales. Findings will be disseminated in peer review open-access journals and at academic conferences.Trial registration numberISRCTN10541045.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document