OBJECTIVE: To assess the relationship between closer monitoring of depressed patients during high-risk treatment periods and death from suicide, using two analytic approaches. DATA SOURCE: VA patients receiving depression treatment between 1999 and 2004. STUDY DESIGN: First, a case-control design was used, adjusting for age, gender, and high-risk days (1,032 cases and 2,058 controls). Second, an instrumental variable (IV) approach (N=714,106) was used, with IVs of (1) average monitoring rates in the VA facility of most use and (2) monitoring rates of VA facilities weighted inversely by distance from patients' residences. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: The case-control approach indicated a modest increase in suicide risk with each additional visit (odds ratio=1.02; 95 percent confidence interval=1.002, 1.04). The "facility used" IV estimate indicated near zero change in risk (0.0008 percent increase; p=.97) with each additional visit, while the distance-weighted IV estimate indicated a 0.032 percent decrease in risk (p=.29). An alternative analysis assuming a threshold effect of ≥4 visits during high-risk periods also showed a decrease (0.15 percent; p=.08) using the distance IV. CONCLUSIONS: The IV approach appeared to address the selection bias more appropriately than the case-control analysis. Neither analysis clearly indicated that closer monitoring during high-risk periods was significantly associated with reduced suicide risks, but the distance-weighted IV estimate suggested a potentially protective effect.
OBJECTIVE: To assess the relationship between closer monitoring of depressedpatients during high-risk treatment periods and death from suicide, using two analytic approaches. DATA SOURCE: VA patients receiving depression treatment between 1999 and 2004. STUDY DESIGN: First, a case-control design was used, adjusting for age, gender, and high-risk days (1,032 cases and 2,058 controls). Second, an instrumental variable (IV) approach (N=714,106) was used, with IVs of (1) average monitoring rates in the VA facility of most use and (2) monitoring rates of VA facilities weighted inversely by distance from patients' residences. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: The case-control approach indicated a modest increase in suicide risk with each additional visit (odds ratio=1.02; 95 percent confidence interval=1.002, 1.04). The "facility used" IV estimate indicated near zero change in risk (0.0008 percent increase; p=.97) with each additional visit, while the distance-weighted IV estimate indicated a 0.032 percent decrease in risk (p=.29). An alternative analysis assuming a threshold effect of ≥4 visits during high-risk periods also showed a decrease (0.15 percent; p=.08) using the distance IV. CONCLUSIONS: The IV approach appeared to address the selection bias more appropriately than the case-control analysis. Neither analysis clearly indicated that closer monitoring during high-risk periods was significantly associated with reduced suicide risks, but the distance-weighted IV estimate suggested a potentially protective effect.
Authors: J John Mann; Alan Apter; Jose Bertolote; Annette Beautrais; Dianne Currier; Ann Haas; Ulrich Hegerl; Jouko Lonnqvist; Kevin Malone; Andrej Marusic; Lars Mehlum; George Patton; Michael Phillips; Wolfgang Rutz; Zoltan Rihmer; Armin Schmidtke; David Shaffer; Morton Silverman; Yoshitomo Takahashi; Airi Varnik; Danuta Wasserman; Paul Yip; Herbert Hendin Journal: JAMA Date: 2005-10-26 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Andrea Charbonneau; Amy K Rosen; Arlene S Ash; Richard R Owen; Boris Kader; Avron Spiro; Cheryl Hankin; Lawrence R Herz; Mary Jo V Pugh; Lewis Kazis; Donald R Miller; Dan R Berlowitz Journal: Med Care Date: 2003-05 Impact factor: 2.983
Authors: Ross L Prentice; Robert Langer; Marcia L Stefanick; Barbara V Howard; Mary Pettinger; Garnet Anderson; David Barad; J David Curb; Jane Kotchen; Lewis Kuller; Marian Limacher; Jean Wactawski-Wende Journal: Am J Epidemiol Date: 2005-07-20 Impact factor: 4.897
Authors: Claire M Spettell; Terry C Wall; Jeroan Allison; Jaimee Calhoun; Richard Kobylinski; Rachel Fargason; Catarina I Kiefe Journal: Health Serv Res Date: 2003-08 Impact factor: 3.402
Authors: Chris Poulin; Brian Shiner; Paul Thompson; Linas Vepstas; Yinong Young-Xu; Benjamin Goertzel; Bradley Watts; Laura Flashman; Thomas McAllister Journal: PLoS One Date: 2014-01-28 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Mark A Ilgen; Amy S B Bohnert; Dara Ganoczy; Matthew J Bair; John F McCarthy; Frederic C Blow Journal: Pain Date: 2016-05 Impact factor: 7.926