Julie E Richards1, Ursula Whiteside1, Evette J Ludman1, Chester Pabiniak1, Beth Kirlin1, Rianna Hidalgo1, Greg Simon1. 1. Kaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute, Seattle (Richards, Ludman, Pabiniak, Kirlin, Simon); Department of Health Services, University of Washington, Seattle (Richards); Nowmattersnow.org , Seattle (Whiteside, Hidalgo); Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle (Whiteside); School of Law, University of California, Berkeley (Hidalgo).
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The authors sought to understand why patients may not report suicidal ideation at a health care visit prior to a suicide attempt. METHODS: Electronic health record data from Kaiser Permanente Washington were used to identify patients who reported having no suicidal ideation on question 9 of the nine-item Patient Health Questionnaire and who subsequently made a suicide attempt (≤60 days). Semistructured interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and analyzed by using a combination of directed (deductive) and conventional (inductive) content analysis to validate and further explore reasons why patients may not report suicidal ideation prior to a suicide attempt. RESULTS: Of 42 adults sampled, 26 agreed to be interviewed, of whom about half were women (N=15) and a majority was white (N=20), with ages ranging from 18 to 63. Key themes were that patients who attempted suicide after having reported no thoughts of self-harm were either not experiencing suicidal ideation at the time of screening or feared the outcome of disclosure, including stigma, overreaction, and loss of autonomy. An additional theme that emerged from the interviews included reports of heavy episodic drinking at the time of the suicide attempt, particularly when suicide was completely unplanned. Patients also identified important aspects of interactions with health care system providers that may facilitate disclosure about suicidal ideation. CONCLUSIONS: Nonjudgmental listening and expressions of caring without overreaction among providers may help patients overcome fear of reporting suicidal ideation. Screening for heavy episodic drinking may help identify individuals who make unplanned suicide attempts.
OBJECTIVE: The authors sought to understand why patients may not report suicidal ideation at a health care visit prior to a suicide attempt. METHODS: Electronic health record data from Kaiser Permanente Washington were used to identify patients who reported having no suicidal ideation on question 9 of the nine-item Patient Health Questionnaire and who subsequently made a suicide attempt (≤60 days). Semistructured interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and analyzed by using a combination of directed (deductive) and conventional (inductive) content analysis to validate and further explore reasons why patients may not report suicidal ideation prior to a suicide attempt. RESULTS: Of 42 adults sampled, 26 agreed to be interviewed, of whom about half were women (N=15) and a majority was white (N=20), with ages ranging from 18 to 63. Key themes were that patients who attempted suicide after having reported no thoughts of self-harm were either not experiencing suicidal ideation at the time of screening or feared the outcome of disclosure, including stigma, overreaction, and loss of autonomy. An additional theme that emerged from the interviews included reports of heavy episodic drinking at the time of the suicide attempt, particularly when suicide was completely unplanned. Patients also identified important aspects of interactions with health care system providers that may facilitate disclosure about suicidal ideation. CONCLUSIONS: Nonjudgmental listening and expressions of caring without overreaction among providers may help patients overcome fear of reporting suicidal ideation. Screening for heavy episodic drinking may help identify individuals who make unplanned suicide attempts.
Entities:
Keywords:
Alcohol/alcoholism; Scales/outcome and clinical measurement; Suicide and self-destructive behavior
Authors: Julie E Richards; Sarah D Hohl; Ursula Whiteside; Evette J Ludman; David C Grossman; Greg E Simon; Susan M Shortreed; Amy K Lee; Rebecca Parrish; Mary Shea; Ryan M Caldeiro; Robert B Penfold; Emily C Williams Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2019-07-25 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Juliana M Holcomb; Anamika Dutta; Paul Bergmann; Alexa Riobueno-Naylor; Haregnesh Haile; Talia S Benheim; Raymond Sturner; Barbara Howard; Michael Jellinek; J Michael Murphy Journal: J Dev Behav Pediatr Date: 2022-02-03 Impact factor: 2.988
Authors: Ana M Progovac; Brian O Mullin; Emilia Dunham; Sari L Reisner; Alex McDowell; Maria Jose Sanchez Roman; Mason Dunn; Cynthia J Telingator; Frederick Q Lu; Aaron Samuel Breslow; Marshall Forstein; Benjamin Lê Cook Journal: Am J Prev Med Date: 2020-03-07 Impact factor: 5.043
Authors: Laika D Aguinaldo; Aimee Goldstone; Brant P Hasler; David A Brent; Clarisa Coronado; Joanna Jacobus Journal: Psychiatry Res Date: 2021-02-23 Impact factor: 3.222
Authors: Lily A Brown; Cecile M Denis; Anthony Leon; Michael B Blank; Steven D Douglas; Knashawn H Morales; Paul F Crits-Christoph; David S Metzger; Dwight L Evans Journal: Drug Alcohol Depend Date: 2021-04-24 Impact factor: 4.852
Authors: Julie E Richards; Sarah D Hohl; Courtney D Segal; David C Grossman; Amy K Lee; Ursula Whiteside; Casey Luce; Evette J Ludman; Greg Simon; Robert B Penfold; Emily C Williams Journal: Psychiatr Serv Date: 2021-05-04 Impact factor: 4.157
Authors: Julie E Richards; Susan M Shortreed; Greg E Simon; Robert B Penfold; Joseph E Glass; Rebecca Ziebell; Emily C Williams Journal: J Addict Med Date: 2020 Sep/Oct Impact factor: 4.647