Marta Moselli1, Camilla Frattini1, Riccardo Williams1, Elsa Ronningstam2. 1. Department of Clinical and Dynamic Psychology, Medicine and Psychology Faculty, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy. 2. Harvard Medical School, McLean Hospital, Belmont, MA, United States.
Abstract
Introduction: Suicide is the outcome of a process starting with the experiences of an unbearable pain or hopelessness, passing from suicidal ideation and planning, to possible para-suicidal behaviors or actual attempts. Recent studies have evidenced the necessity to integrate approaches based on the identification of psychopathological diagnoses and other variables as possible predictors of suicidal conduct with a more clinically based approach. A clinical assessment is needed that focuses on the patients' mental state with respect to thoughts concerning death and suicide. In particular, a qualitative assessment of motivations underlying the suicidal process could represent an effective guide for clinicians engaged in the difficult field of preventing adolescents' suicidal gestures. Most instruments investigating the suicidal motivation are self-report measures, possibly resulting in a lack of sufficiently valid assessment of this area. In the present work, we present the Motivational Interview for Suicidality in Adolescence (MIS-A) aiming at identifying the motivational areas sustaining suicidal ideation and gestures in this phase of development. Materials and Methods: The identification of the different areas derives from a thorough review of the empirical literature subsequently vetted by expert clinicians who selected specific reasons behind suicidal ideation and gesture. Result: The MIS is a semi-structured clinician-report interview. The interview is composed of seven areas and 14 sub-areas, evaluated on a four-point Likert scale: illness motivated attempts area, chronic presence of internal pessimistic criticism area, sense of defeat and entrapment area, relational area, external motivated crisis area, extreme and unusual cases area, and lack of control area. Conclusions: The path followed in the creation of the MIS reflects both an empirically orientated and a clinically informed approach. Creating this MIS is the first step within a wider research project that will allow one to test the reliability of the instrument.
Introduction: Suicide is the outcome of a process starting with the experiences of an unbearable pain or hopelessness, passing from suicidal ideation and planning, to possible para-suicidal behaviors or actual attempts. Recent studies have evidenced the necessity to integrate approaches based on the identification of psychopathological diagnoses and other variables as possible predictors of suicidal conduct with a more clinically based approach. A clinical assessment is needed that focuses on the patients' mental state with respect to thoughts concerning death and suicide. In particular, a qualitative assessment of motivations underlying the suicidal process could represent an effective guide for clinicians engaged in the difficult field of preventing adolescents' suicidal gestures. Most instruments investigating the suicidal motivation are self-report measures, possibly resulting in a lack of sufficiently valid assessment of this area. In the present work, we present the Motivational Interview for Suicidality in Adolescence (MIS-A) aiming at identifying the motivational areas sustaining suicidal ideation and gestures in this phase of development. Materials and Methods: The identification of the different areas derives from a thorough review of the empirical literature subsequently vetted by expert clinicians who selected specific reasons behind suicidal ideation and gesture. Result: The MIS is a semi-structured clinician-report interview. The interview is composed of seven areas and 14 sub-areas, evaluated on a four-point Likert scale: illness motivated attempts area, chronic presence of internal pessimistic criticism area, sense of defeat and entrapment area, relational area, external motivated crisis area, extreme and unusual cases area, and lack of control area. Conclusions: The path followed in the creation of the MIS reflects both an empirically orientated and a clinically informed approach. Creating this MIS is the first step within a wider research project that will allow one to test the reliability of the instrument.