Making Decisions About Calling 988 Versus 911: Understanding End-User Views Before the Launch of 988.

OBJECTIVE: The 988 telephone number was implemented in July 2022 as an easily accessible way to reach the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline and has been envisioned as one step in building a more robust crisis care continuum in the United States. This study aimed to describe how various stakeholders anticipated using 988 compared with the most widely known crisis line: 911. METHODS: Focus groups (N=15, with 76 total participants) were conducted in three counties in New York State between October and November 2021, before the launch of 988. Five stakeholder groups were included: mental health services consumers, family members of consumers, community members, mental health providers, and crisis call takers. Thematic analysis was used to code and analyze all focus group transcripts. RESULTS: Participants anticipated that key uses for 988 would be accessing support during a crisis, obtaining connections to local resources and services, and receiving alternatives to law enforcement response. However, participants continued to articulate uses for 911 during a mental health crisis, especially for situations involving "safety concerns." CONCLUSIONS: The broad expectations for 988 suggest that the line must be flexible and responsive to a range of needs and that communities should clearly define what is available through 988. More implementation research is needed to ensure a detailed understanding of those whom 988 is serving, how the line meets callers' needs, and the line's potential for connecting people to needed services.

Hotline Use in the United States: Results from the Collaborative Psychiatric Epidemiology Surveys.

Crisis hotlines are a fixture in providing mental health services to individuals experiencing mental and behavioral problems in the United States (U.S.). Despite this, and the growing need for easily-accessible, anonymous, and free services amidst the suicide and opioid crises, there is no study reporting U.S. national prevalence and correlates of hotline use. Data on n = 18,909 participants from the Collaborative Psychiatric Epidemiology Surveys (CPES), a group of three nationally-representative, population-based studies, were used to estimate the prevalence of lifetime and past 12-month hotline use. A series of logistic regression models examined sociodemographic, clinical history and service use correlates of hotline use. Lifetime and past 12-month hotline use was estimated at 2.5% and 0.5%, respectively. Being female, having a mental or behavioral disorder, experiencing suicidality, or interacting with other formal and informal sectors of the mental health service system were significant correlates of use. This study provides the first national estimates of crisis hotline usage in the U.S. Hotlines are more likely to be used by certain sociodemographic subgroups, but these differences may be due to differing psychiatric history and service use patterns. Efforts should be made to ensure that crisis hotlines are being utilized by other marginalized populations at high risk of suicide or overdose amidst the current public health crises in the U.S., such as racial/ethnic minorities or youth. To evaluate the role that crisis hotlines play in the mental health service system, national surveys should aim to monitor trends and correlates over time.

Crisis Text Line use following the release of Netflix series 13 Reasons Why Season 1: Time-series analysis of help-seeking behavior in youth.

The availability of near real-time data from Crisis Text Line (CTL) and other technology-based platforms on crisis events provides an opportunity for targeted interventions prior to serious mental health outcomes (e.g., suicide, self-harm). This study examined the association between the release of the popular Netflix series 13 Reasons Why (13RW) and CTL usage in a national sample of youth in the US. We implemented interrupted time-series, autoregressive integrated moving average (ARIMA) modeling to examine this association at a daily scale. We observed a significant but momentary rise in CTL conversation volume following the release of 13RW on April 5 and 6, 2017 followed by a significant reduction (12.7%) in conversation volume for the overall study period. This reduction in call volume was sustained for 49 days and is the most sustained reduction in conversation volume in the 365 day dataset. This unexpected trough in conversation volume is concerning in light of elevated search engine volume for terms indicating an increase in suicidal thoughts in the days following the release of the show (Ayers et al., 2017). CTL was featured by the show as a resource for viewers in the recently released Season 2, and our results highlight the reasoning and need for such promotion. Future work should explore whether the promotion of CTL in Season 2 positively impacted conversation volume, as there is a clear need to harness the power of these digital technologies to detect population-based trends in mental health and expand the reach of life saving services.

Characteristics and Proximal Outcomes of Calls Made to Suicide Crisis Hotlines in California.

BACKGROUND: Suicide hotlines are commonly used to prevent suicides, although centers vary with respect to their management and operations. AIMS: To describe variability across suicide prevention hotlines. METHOD: Live monitoring of 241 calls was conducted at 10 suicide prevention hotlines in California. RESULTS: Call centers are similar with respect to caller characteristics and the concerns callers raise during their calls. The proportion of callers at risk for suicide varied from 3 to 57%. Compliance with asking about current suicide risk, past ideation, and past attempts also ranged considerably. Callers to centers that were part of the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline (NSPL) were more likely to experience reduced distress than callers to centers that were not part of the NSPL. CONCLUSION: Because callers do not generally choose the center or responder that will take their call, it is critical to promote quality across call centers and minimize the variability that currently exists. Accrediting bodies, funders, and crisis centers should require that centers continuously monitor calls to ensure and improve call quality.

Implementation and use of a crisis hotline during the treatment as usual and universal screening phases of a suicide intervention study.

BACKGROUND: Although research suggests that crisis hotlines are an effective means of mitigating suicide risk, lack of empirical evidence may limit the use of this method as a research safety protocol. PURPOSE: This study describes the use of a crisis hotline to provide clinical backup for research assessments. METHODS: Data were analyzed from participants in the Emergency Department Safety and Follow-up Evaluation (ED-SAFE) study (n=874). Socio-demographics, call completion data, and data available on suicide attempts occurring in relation to the crisis counseling call were analyzed. Pearson chi-squared statistic for differences in proportions were conducted to compare characteristics of patients receiving versus not receiving crisis counseling. P<0.05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: Overall, there were 163 counseling calls (6% of total assessment calls) from 135 (16%) of the enrolled subjects who were transferred to the crisis line because of suicide risk identified during the research assessment. For those transferred to the crisis line, the median age was 40 years (interquartile range 27-48) with 67% female, 80% white, and 11% Hispanic. CONCLUSIONS: Increasing demand for suicide interventions in diverse healthcare settings warrants consideration of crisis hotlines as a safety protocol mechanism. Our findings provide background on how a crisis hotline was implemented as a safety measure, as well as the type of patients who may utilize this safety protocol.