Adele C Viguera1, Nicholas Milano2, Ralston Laurel3, Nicolas R Thompson4, Sandra D Griffith4, Ross J Baldessarini5, Irene L Katzan6. 1. Department of Psychiatry, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH; Neurological Institute Center for Outcomes Research & Evaluation, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH. Electronic address: viguera@ccf.org. 2. Department of Neurology, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH. 3. Department of Psychiatry, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH. 4. Neurological Institute Center for Outcomes Research & Evaluation, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH; Department of Quantitative Health Sciences, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH. 5. Department of Psychiatry, Harvard Medical School, and International Consortium for Bipolar & Psychotic Disorders Research, McLean Hospital, Boston, MA. 6. Neurological Institute Center for Outcomes Research & Evaluation, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH; Department of Neurology, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Patient-reported data can improve clinical care, including identifying patients who are at risk for suicide. METHODS: In a tertiary care, psychiatric outpatient clinic, we compared computerized self-assessments of suicidal risk based on item 9 of the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 and an electronic version of the Columbia Suicide Severity Rating Scale (C-SSRS), using retrospective medical record review of clinical psychiatric assessments as the reference standard. We also surveyed patients׳ attitudes about participating in the process. We compared prevalence of suicidal risk rates by the 3 assessment methods as well as their sensitivity, specificity, and predictive value. RESULTS: Observed prevalence of positive suicidal risk screenings differed significantly, ranking (1) Patient Health Questionnaire-9 item 9, 24% (343/1416; 95% CI: 22%-26%) < (2) C-SSRS, 6.0% (85/1416; 95% CI: 5.0%-7.4%) < (3) clinical assessment, 1.4% (20/1416; 95% CI: 0.9%-2.2%). The sensitivity of Patient Health Questionnaire-9 item 9 was 92% (78/85; 95% CI: 86%-98%) and the specificity was 81% (1107/1376; 95% CI: 78%-82%). The sensitivity of the C-SSRS was 95.0% (19/20; 95% CI: 75%-100%) and the specificity was 95% (1330/1396; 95% CI: 94%-96%). Of 100 patients surveyed, the screening was well accepted, with some concerns about confidentiality and adequate clinical follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: As expected, Patient Health Questionnaire-9 item 9 generated much higher rates of apparently false-positive findings than the C-SSRS did, when compared with clinical assessment. C-SSRS backed with timely clinical assessment may be a useful and efficient method of screening for suicidal risk, provided that adequate, immediate clinical follow-up is available.
BACKGROUND:Patient-reported data can improve clinical care, including identifying patients who are at risk for suicide. METHODS: In a tertiary care, psychiatricoutpatient clinic, we compared computerized self-assessments of suicidal risk based on item 9 of the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 and an electronic version of the Columbia Suicide Severity Rating Scale (C-SSRS), using retrospective medical record review of clinical psychiatric assessments as the reference standard. We also surveyed patients׳ attitudes about participating in the process. We compared prevalence of suicidal risk rates by the 3 assessment methods as well as their sensitivity, specificity, and predictive value. RESULTS: Observed prevalence of positive suicidal risk screenings differed significantly, ranking (1) Patient Health Questionnaire-9 item 9, 24% (343/1416; 95% CI: 22%-26%) < (2) C-SSRS, 6.0% (85/1416; 95% CI: 5.0%-7.4%) < (3) clinical assessment, 1.4% (20/1416; 95% CI: 0.9%-2.2%). The sensitivity of Patient Health Questionnaire-9 item 9 was 92% (78/85; 95% CI: 86%-98%) and the specificity was 81% (1107/1376; 95% CI: 78%-82%). The sensitivity of the C-SSRS was 95.0% (19/20; 95% CI: 75%-100%) and the specificity was 95% (1330/1396; 95% CI: 94%-96%). Of 100 patients surveyed, the screening was well accepted, with some concerns about confidentiality and adequate clinical follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: As expected, Patient Health Questionnaire-9 item 9 generated much higher rates of apparently false-positive findings than the C-SSRS did, when compared with clinical assessment. C-SSRS backed with timely clinical assessment may be a useful and efficient method of screening for suicidal risk, provided that adequate, immediate clinical follow-up is available.
Authors: Lynsay Ayer; Lisa M Horowitz; Lisa Colpe; Nathan J Lowry; Patrick C Ryan; Edwin Boudreaux; Virna Little; Stephen Erban; Soett Ramirez-Estrada; Michael Schoenbaum Journal: J Acad Consult Liaison Psychiatry Date: 2022-05-23
Authors: Philippe Mortier; Randy P Auerbach; Jordi Alonso; Jason Bantjes; Corina Benjet; Pim Cuijpers; David D Ebert; Jennifer Greif Green; Penelope Hasking; Matthew K Nock; Siobhan O'Neill; Stephanie Pinder-Amaker; Nancy A Sampson; Gemma Vilagut; Alan M Zaslavsky; Ronny Bruffaerts; Ronald C Kessler Journal: J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry Date: 2018-02-13 Impact factor: 8.829
Authors: Philippe Mortier; Jordi Alonso; Randy P Auerbach; Jason Bantjes; Corina Benjet; Ronny Bruffaerts; Pim Cuijpers; David D Ebert; Jennifer Greif Green; Penelope Hasking; Eirini Karyotaki; Glenn Kiekens; Arthur Mak; Matthew K Nock; Siobhan O'Neill; Stephanie Pinder-Amaker; Nancy A Sampson; Dan J Stein; Gemma Vilagut; Chelsey Wilks; Alan M Zaslavsky; Patrick Mair; Ronald C Kessler Journal: Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol Date: 2021-08-23 Impact factor: 4.519
Authors: Susan L Dunn; Holli A DeVon; Eileen G Collins; Anna Luong; Madison P Buursma; Melissa Gutierrez-Kapheim; Ulf G Bronas Journal: Nurs Res Date: 2021 Jan/Feb Impact factor: 2.381