Sarah Steeg1, Matthew Haigh2, Roger T Webb3, Nav Kapur3, Yvonne Awenat4, Patricia Gooding4, Daniel Pratt4, Jayne Cooper3. 1. Centre for Suicide Prevention, University of Manchester, United Kingdom. Electronic address: sarah.steeg@manchester.ac.uk. 2. Department of Psychology, Northumbria University Newcastle, United Kingdom. 3. Centre for Suicide Prevention, University of Manchester, United Kingdom. 4. School of Psychological Sciences, University of Manchester, United Kingdom.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Hopelessness is frequently observed in people who harm themselves and is an established risk factor for nonfatal self-harm repetition and suicide. Little is known about how the presence of hopelessness in addition to other risk factors affects subsequent risk. METHOD: Prospective cohort of 19,479 individuals presenting with self-harm to one of three English Emergency Departments between 1st January 2000 and 31st December 2010. Repeat self-harm and suicide deaths within twelve months of the first assessed episode were identified. Cox Proportional Hazards models were used to estimate Hazard Ratios (HRs) for risk factors with and without hopelessness. RESULTS: A clinical impression of hopelessness was associated with increased risk of further self-harm (HR 1.35, 95% CI 1.16-1.58) and suicide (HR 2.56, CI 1.10-5.96) in the year following an index episode. For individuals who were living alone or homeless, unemployed, reported problems with housing, had received psychiatric treatment in the past, were currently receiving treatment or used alcohol during the self-harm episode, an exacerbation of an already elevated risk of repetition was observed amongst those who were assessed as hopeless. Where individuals presented with forensic problems, physical health problems or bereavement, an increase in risk was only observed for those who were also assessed as hopeless. LIMITATIONS: A clinical impression of hopelessness was assigned using a binary "yes"/"no" classification rather than a validated scale. CONCLUSIONS: Hopelessness intensifies the impact of several known risk factors for adverse outcomes following self-harm. These findings highlight the importance of identifying and therapeutically addressing this dynamic but potentially modifiable clinical risk factor during the psychosocial assessment and in subsequent care.
BACKGROUND: Hopelessness is frequently observed in people who harm themselves and is an established risk factor for nonfatal self-harm repetition and suicide. Little is known about how the presence of hopelessness in addition to other risk factors affects subsequent risk. METHOD: Prospective cohort of 19,479 individuals presenting with self-harm to one of three English Emergency Departments between 1st January 2000 and 31st December 2010. Repeat self-harm and suicide deaths within twelve months of the first assessed episode were identified. Cox Proportional Hazards models were used to estimate Hazard Ratios (HRs) for risk factors with and without hopelessness. RESULTS: A clinical impression of hopelessness was associated with increased risk of further self-harm (HR 1.35, 95% CI 1.16-1.58) and suicide (HR 2.56, CI 1.10-5.96) in the year following an index episode. For individuals who were living alone or homeless, unemployed, reported problems with housing, had received psychiatric treatment in the past, were currently receiving treatment or used alcohol during the self-harm episode, an exacerbation of an already elevated risk of repetition was observed amongst those who were assessed as hopeless. Where individuals presented with forensic problems, physical health problems or bereavement, an increase in risk was only observed for those who were also assessed as hopeless. LIMITATIONS: A clinical impression of hopelessness was assigned using a binary "yes"/"no" classification rather than a validated scale. CONCLUSIONS: Hopelessness intensifies the impact of several known risk factors for adverse outcomes following self-harm. These findings highlight the importance of identifying and therapeutically addressing this dynamic but potentially modifiable clinical risk factor during the psychosocial assessment and in subsequent care.
Authors: Leah Quinlivan; Jayne Cooper; Declan Meehan; Damien Longson; John Potokar; Tom Hulme; Jennifer Marsden; Fiona Brand; Kezia Lange; Elena Riseborough; Lisa Page; Chris Metcalfe; Linda Davies; Rory O'Connor; Keith Hawton; David Gunnell; Nav Kapur Journal: Br J Psychiatry Date: 2017-03-16 Impact factor: 9.319
Authors: Juan-Luis Muñoz-Sánchez; María Cruz Sánchez-Gómez; María Victoria Martín-Cilleros; Esther Parra-Vidales; Diego de Leo; Manuel A Franco-Martín Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2018-09-26 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Guoxiang Chen; Qiqing Mo; Xinguang Chen; Bin Yu; Huiming He; Guojun Wang; Cunxian Jia; Liang Zhou; Zhenyu Ma Journal: Front Public Health Date: 2022-06-16
Authors: Xenia Gonda; Jane Sarginson; Nora Eszlari; Peter Petschner; Zoltan G Toth; Daniel Baksa; Gabor Hullam; Ian M Anderson; J F William Deakin; Gabriella Juhasz; Gyorgy Bagdy Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2017-10-10 Impact factor: 4.379
Authors: Patricia A Gooding; Daniel Pratt; Yvonne Awenat; Richard Drake; Rachel Elliott; Richard Emsley; Charlotte Huggett; Steven Jones; Navneet Kapur; Fiona Lobban; Sarah Peters; Gillian Haddock Journal: BMC Psychiatry Date: 2020-06-16 Impact factor: 3.630