| Literature DB >> 35204000 |
April R Smith1, Shruti Kinkel-Ram2, William Grunwald1, Tony Sam George3, Vaishali Raval2.
Abstract
Although 20% of the world's suicides occur in India, suicide prevention efforts in India are lagging (Vijayakumar et al., 2021). Identification of risk factors for suicide in India, as well as the development of accessible interventions to treat these risk factors, could help reduce suicide in India. Interoceptive dysfunction-or an inability to recognize internal sensations in the body-has emerged as a robust correlate of suicidality among studies conducted in the United States. Additionally, a mindfulness-informed intervention designed to reduce interoceptive dysfunction, and thereby suicidality, has yielded promising initial effects in pilot testing (Smith et al., 2021). The current studies sought to replicate these findings in an Indian context. Study 1 (n = 276) found that specific aspects of interoceptive dysfunction were related to current, past, and future likelihood of suicidal ideation. Study 2 (n = 40) was a small, uncontrolled pre-post online pilot of the intervention, Reconnecting to Internal Sensations and Experiences (RISE). The intervention was rated as highly acceptable and demonstrated good retention. Additionally, the intervention was associated with improvements in certain aspects of interoceptive dysfunction and reductions in suicidal ideation and eating pathology. These preliminary results suggest further testing of the intervention among Indian samples is warranted.Entities:
Keywords: India; interoception; interoceptive dysfunction; online intervention; suicide
Year: 2022 PMID: 35204000 PMCID: PMC8870213 DOI: 10.3390/brainsci12020237
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Brain Sci ISSN: 2076-3425
Zero-order correlations for all MAIA subscales and current, past, and future likelihood of suicidal ideation symptoms in Study 1.
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| 2.53 (1.19) | 2.32 (1.18) | 2.43 (0.89) | 2.63 (0.97) | 3.17 (1.16) | 2.87 (1.20) | 2.25 (1.26) | 3.31 (1.24) | 0.67 (1.59) | ||
| 1. Noticing | − | ||||||||||
| 2. Not Distracting | −0.41 ** | - | |||||||||
| 3. Not Worrying + | −0.18 ** | 0.11 + | - | ||||||||
| 4. Attention Regulation | −0.43 ** | 0.21 ** | 0.16 ** | - | |||||||
| 5. Emotion Awareness | 0.52 ** | −0.29** | −0.15 * | 0.55 ** | - | ||||||
| 6. Self-Regulation | 0.36 ** | −0.09 | 0.11 * | 0.55 ** | 0.62 ** | - | |||||
| 7. Body Listening | 0.46 ** | −0.11 | −0.03 | 0.53 ** | 0.58 ** | 0.62 ** | - | ||||
| 8. Body Trust | 0.25 ** | −0.05 | 0.12 * | 0.51 ** | 0.44 ** | 0.55 ** | 0.44 ** | - | |||
| 9. Current SI | 0.10 | −0.18 ** | −0.12 * | −0.04 | 0.00 | −0.08 | −0.01 | −0.22 ** | - | ||
| 10. Past SI | 0.06 | −0.16 ** | −0.08 | −0.07 | −0.03 | −0.09 | −0.02 | −0.23 ** | 0.52 ** | - | |
| 11. Future SI ++ | 0.13 | −0.26 ** | −0.12 | 0.05 | 0.06 | −0.13 | −0.08 | −0.38 ** | 0.66 ** | X | - |
Note. Items 1–8 refer to MAIA subscales; SI = Suicidal Ideation; +p = 0.06, * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01. ++ Future SI question was only answered by those who endorsed past SI (n = 98), as such a correlation between past and future SI cannot be computed.
Study 3 paired t-test results of Reconnecting to Internal Sensations and Experiences intervention among participants who completed the pre and post assessments (n = 31).
| Pre | Post | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| Interoception | |||||
| Attention Regulation | 2.76 (1.01) | 2.93 (1.11) | −1.02 | 0.31 | −0.18 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Emotional Awareness | 3.34 (1.10) | 3.54 (1.00) | −1.28 | 0.21 | −0.23 |
| Not Distracting | 2.09 (1.06) | 2.39 (1.03) | −1.64 | 0.11 | −0.30 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Not Worry | 2.59 (1.03) | 2.74 (0.95) | −1.04 | 0.31 | −0.19 |
| Self-Regulation | 3.12 (1.31) | 3.40 (1.10) | −1.39 | 0.17 | −0.25 |
| Trusting | 3.56 (1.26) | 3.73 (0.97) | −0.74 | 0.46 | −0.13 |
| Psychological symptoms | 21.14 (15.63) | 19.59 (15.55) | 0.84 | 0.41 | 0.16 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Suicidal ideation | 1.00 (2.02) | 0.71 (1.74) | 1.72 | 0.10 | 0.31 |
Note. Statistically significant differences appear in bold text.