Means restriction for the prevention of suicide on roads.

BACKGROUND: Road traffic suicides are common. However, due to the difficulty in distinguishing between motor vehicle crash fatalities and actual suicides, no official figures exist for this method of suicide. Restricting access to means is an important universal or population-based approach to suicide prevention with clear evidence of its effectiveness. However, the evidence with respect to means restriction for the prevention of suicide on roads is not well established. We conducted a systematic review to assess the impact of restrictions on the availability of, or access to, means of suicide on roads. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effectiveness of interventions to restrict the availability of, or access to, means of suicide on roads. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, and the Transport Research International Documentation (TRID) Database from the date of database inception to March 2020. We conducted searches of the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) and ClinicalTrials.gov to identify unpublished and ongoing studies. We applied no date, language, or publication status restrictions to these searches. SELECTION CRITERIA: Eligible studies were randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials, controlled intervention studies without randomisation, before-after studies, or studies using interrupted time series designs, which evaluated interventions to restrict the availability of, or access to, means of suicide on roads. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors screened abstracts and full-text publications against the inclusion criteria. Two review authors planned to independently extract data and assess risk of bias of included studies. However, we identified no studies eligible for inclusion. MAIN RESULTS: We identified no studies that met the inclusion criteria for this review. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review highlights the paucity of research around road traffic suicides and the need for future robust studies that aim to investigate the effectiveness of interventions to prevent suicide on roads. Suicide ascertainment is a key issue; therefore, clear objective criteria are necessary in order to scale up and study this method more accurately. In the absence of any substantial evidence, we advocate for more awareness on road traffic suicides and its inclusion in future government suicide prevention policies. Further research exploring effective measures, particularly those that do not require driver compliance, are also needed.

Means restriction for the prevention of suicide by jumping.

BACKGROUND: Jumping from a height is an uncommon but lethal means of suicide. Restricting access to means is an important universal or population-based approach to suicide prevention with clear evidence of its effectiveness. However, the evidence with respect to means restriction for the prevention of suicide by jumping is not well established. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effectiveness of interventions to restrict the availability of, or access to, means of suicide by jumping. These include the use of physical barriers, fencing or safety nets at frequently-used jumping sites, or restriction of access to these sites, such as by way of road closures. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Library, Embase, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and Web of Science to May 2019. We conducted additional searches of the international trial registries including the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) and ClinicalTrials.gov, to identify relevant unpublished and ongoing studies. We searched the reference lists of all included studies and relevant systematic reviews to identify additional studies and contacted authors and subject experts for information on unpublished or ongoing studies. We applied no restrictions on date, language or publication status to the searches. Two review authors independently assessed all citations from the searches and identified relevant titles and abstracts. Our main outcomes of interest were suicide, attempted suicide or self-harm, and cost-effectiveness of interventions. SELECTION CRITERIA: Eligible studies were randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials, controlled intervention studies without randomisation, before-and-after studies, or studies using interrupted time series designs, which evaluated interventions to restrict the availability of, or access to, means of suicide by jumping. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently selected studies for inclusion and three review authors extracted study data. We pooled studies that evaluated similar interventions and outcomes using a random-effects meta-analysis, and we synthesised data from other studies in a narrative summary. We summarised the quality of the evidence included in this review using the GRADE approach. MAIN RESULTS: We included 14 studies in this review. Thirteen were before-and-after studies and one was a cost-effectiveness analysis. Three studies each took place in Switzerland and the USA, while two studies each were from the UK, Canada, New Zealand, and Australia respectively. The majority of studies (10/14) assessed jumping means restriction interventions delivered in isolation, half of which were at bridges. Due to the observational nature of included studies, none compared comparator interventions or control conditions. During the pre- and postintervention period among the 13 before-and-after studies, a total of 742.3 suicides (5.5 suicides per year) occurred during the pre-intervention period (134.5 study years), while 70.6 suicides (0.8 suicides per year) occurred during the postintervention period (92.4 study years) - a 91% reduction in suicides. A meta-analysis of all studies assessing jumping means restriction interventions (delivered in isolation or in combination with other interventions) showed a directionality of effect in favour of the interventions, as evidenced by a reduction in the number of suicides at intervention sites (12 studies; incidence rate ratio (IRR) = 0.09, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.03 to 0.27; P < 0.001; I2 = 88.40%). Similar findings were demonstrated for studies assessing jumping means restriction interventions delivered in isolation (9 studies; IRR = 0.05, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.16; P < 0.001; I2 = 73.67%), studies assessing jumping means restriction interventions delivered in combination with other interventions (3 studies; IRR = 0.54, 95% CI 0.31 to 0.93; P = 0.03; I2 = 40.8%), studies assessing the effectiveness of physical barriers (7 studies; IRR = 0.07, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.24; P < 0.001; I2 = 84.07%), and studies assessing the effectiveness of safety nets (2 studies; IRR = 0.09, 95% CI 0.01 to 1.30; P = 0.07; I2 = 29.3%). Data on suicide attempts were limited and none of the studies used self-harm as an outcome. There was considerable heterogeneity between studies for the primary outcome (suicide) in the majority of the analyses except those relating to jumping means restriction delivered in combination with other interventions, and safety nets. Nevertheless, every study included in the forest plots showed the same directional effects in favour of jumping means restriction. Due to methodological limitations of the included studies, we rated the quality of the evidence from these studies as low. A cost-effectiveness analysis suggested that the construction of a physical barrier on a bridge would be a highly cost-effective project in the long term as a result of overall reduced suicide mortality. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The findings from this review suggest that jumping means restriction interventions are capable of reducing the frequency of suicides by jumping. However, due to methodological limitations of included studies, this finding is based on low-quality evidence. Therefore, further well-designed high-quality studies are required to further evaluate the effectiveness of these interventions, as well as other measures at jumping sites. In addition, further research is required to investigate the potential for suicide method substitution and displacement effects in populations exposed to interventions to prevent suicide by jumping.

A systematic review of interventions to prevent suicidal behaviors and reduce suicidal ideation in older people.

BACKGROUND: Older people have a high risk of suicide but research in this area has been largely neglected. Unlike for younger age groups, it remains unclear what strategies for prevention exist for older adults. This systematic review assesses the effectiveness of interventions to prevent suicidal behavior and reduce suicidal ideation in this age group. METHODS: MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Web of Science, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) were searched for relevant publications from their dates of inception until 1 April 2016. Studies included in this review report effectiveness data about interventions delivered to older adults to prevent suicidal behavior (suicide, attempted suicide, and self-harm without suicidal intent) or reduce suicidal ideation. A narrative synthesis approach was used to analyze data and present findings. RESULTS: Twenty one studies met the criteria for inclusion in the study. Most programs addressed risk predictors, specifically depression. Effective interventions were multifaceted primary care-based depression screening and management programs; treatment interventions (pharmacotherapy and psychotherapy); telephone counseling for vulnerable older adults; and community-based programs incorporating education, gatekeeper training, depression screening, group activities, and referral for treatment. Most of the studies were of low quality apart from the primary care-based randomized controlled trials. CONCLUSIONS: Multifaceted interventions directed at primary care physicians and populations, and at-risk elderly individuals in the community may be effective at preventing suicidal behavior and reducing suicidal ideation in older adults. However, more high quality trials are needed to demonstrate successful interventions.

The Effectiveness and Cost-Effectiveness of Community Diagnostic Centres: A Rapid Review.

Objectives: To examine the effectiveness of community diagnostic centres as a potential solution to increasing capacity and reducing pressure on secondary care in the UK. Methods: A comprehensive search for relevant primary studies was conducted in a range of electronic sources in August 2022. Screening and critical appraisal were undertaken by two independent reviewers. There were no geographical restrictions or limits to year of publication. A narrative synthesis approach was used to analyse data and present findings. Results: Twenty primary studies evaluating twelve individual diagnostic centres were included. Most studies were specific to cancer diagnosis and evaluated diagnostic centres located within hospitals. The evidence of effectiveness appeared mixed. There is evidence to suggest diagnostic centres can reduce various waiting times and reduce pressure on secondary care. However, cost-effectiveness may depend on whether the diagnostic centre is running at full capacity. Most included studies used weak methodologies that may be inadequate to infer effectiveness. Conclusion: Further well-designed, quality research is needed to better understand the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of community diagnostic centres.

Living alone, loneliness and lack of emotional support as predictors of suicide and self-harm: A nine-year follow up of the UK Biobank cohort.

BACKGROUND: The association between loneliness and suicide is poorly understood. We investigated how living alone, loneliness and emotional support were related to suicide and self-harm in a longitudinal design. METHODS: Between 2006 and 2010 UK Biobank recruited and assessed in detail over 0.5 million people in middle age. Data were linked to prospective hospital admission and mortality records. Adjusted Cox regression models were used to investigate relationships between living arrangements, loneliness and emotional support, and both suicide and self-harm as outcomes. RESULTS: For men, both living alone (Hazard Ratio (HR) 2.16, 95%CI 1.51-3.09) and living with non-partners (HR 1.80, 95%CI 1.08-3.00) were associated with death by suicide, independently of loneliness, which had a modest relationship with suicide (HR 1.43, 95%CI 0.1.01-2.03). For women, there was no evidence that living arrangements, loneliness or emotional support were associated with death by suicide. Associations between living alone and self-harm were explained by health for women, and by health, loneliness and emotional support for men. In fully adjusted models, loneliness was associated with hospital admissions for self-harm in both women (HR 1.89, 95%CI 1.57-2.28) and men (HR 1.74, 95%CI 1.40-2.16). LIMITATIONS: Loneliness and emotional support were operationalized using single item measures. CONCLUSIONS: For men - but not for women - living alone or living with a non-partner increased the risk of suicide, a finding not explained by subjective loneliness. Overall, loneliness may be more important as a risk factor for self-harm than for suicide. Loneliness also appears to lessen the protective associations of cohabitation.

Systematic review of the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on suicidal behaviour amongst health and social care workers across the world.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has had an impact on the mental health of healthcare and social care workers, and its potential effect on suicidal thoughts and behaviour is of particular concern. METHODS: This systematic review identified and appraised the published literature that has reported on the impact of COVID-19 on suicidal thoughts and behaviour and self-harm amongst healthcare and social care workers worldwide up to May 31, 2021. RESULTS: Out of 37 potentially relevant papers identified, ten met our eligibility criteria. Our review has highlighted that the impact of COVID-19 has varied as a function of setting, working relationships, occupational roles, and psychiatric comorbidities. LIMITATIONS: There have been no completed cohort studies comparing pre- and post-pandemic suicidal thoughts and behaviours. It is possible some papers may have been missed in the search. CONCLUSIONS: The current quality of evidence pertaining to suicidal behaviour in healthcare workers is poor, and evidence is entirely absent for those working in social care. The clinical relevance of this work is to bring attention to what evidence exists, and to encourage, in practice, proactive approaches to interventions for improving healthcare and social care worker mental health.

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on self-harm and suicidal behaviour: update of living systematic review.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has caused considerable morbidity, mortality and disruption to people's lives around the world. There are concerns that rates of suicide and suicidal behaviour may rise during and in its aftermath. Our living systematic review synthesises findings from emerging literature on incidence and prevalence of suicidal behaviour as well as suicide prevention efforts in relation to COVID-19, with this iteration synthesising relevant evidence up to 19 th October 2020. Method:  Automated daily searches feed into a web-based database with screening and data extraction functionalities. Eligibility criteria include incidence/prevalence of suicidal behaviour, exposure-outcome relationships and effects of interventions in relation to the COVID-19 pandemic. Outcomes of interest are suicide, self-harm or attempted suicide and suicidal thoughts. No restrictions are placed on language or study type, except for single-person case reports. We exclude one-off cross-sectional studies without either pre-pandemic measures or comparisons of COVID-19 positive vs. unaffected individuals. Results: Searches identified 6,226 articles. Seventy-eight articles met our inclusion criteria. We identified a further 64 relevant cross-sectional studies that did not meet our revised inclusion criteria. Thirty-four articles were not peer-reviewed (e.g. research letters, pre-prints). All articles were based on observational studies. There was no consistent evidence of a rise in suicide but many studies noted adverse economic effects were evolving. There was evidence of a rise in community distress, fall in hospital presentation for suicidal behaviour and early evidence of an increased frequency of suicidal thoughts in those who had become infected with COVID-19. Conclusions:  Research evidence of the impact of COVID-19 on suicidal behaviour is accumulating rapidly. This living review provides a regular synthesis of the most up-to-date research evidence to guide public health and clinical policy to mitigate the impact of COVID-19 on suicide risk as the longer term impacts of the pandemic on suicide risk are researched.

Prehospital recognition and antibiotics for 999 patients with sepsis: protocol for a feasibility study.

BACKGROUND: Sepsis is a common condition which kills between 36,000 and 64,000 people every year in the UK. Early recognition and management of sepsis has been shown to reduce mortality and improve the health and well-being of people with sepsis. Paramedics frequently come into contact with patients with sepsis and are well placed to provide early diagnosis and treatment.We aim to determine the feasibility of undertaking a fully powered randomised controlled trial (RCT) to test the clinical and cost-effectiveness of paramedics obtaining blood cultures from and administering IV antibiotics to patients with sepsis, so we can make a decision about whether to proceed to a fully powered randomised controlled trial, which will answer questions regarding safety and effectiveness for patients and benefit to the National Health Service (NHS). METHODS/DESIGN: This is an individually randomised, two-arm feasibility study for a randomised controlled trial with a 1:1 ratio. Sixty paramedics will receive training to assist them to recognise sepsis using a screening tool, obtain blood cultures, and provide IV antibiotics. If sepsis is suspected, paramedics will randomly allocate patients to intervention or usual care using their next sequential individually issued scratch card. Patients will be followed up at 90 days using linked anonymised data to capture length of hospital admission and mortality. We will also collect self-reported health-related quality of life (using SF-12) at this time. We will interview ten patients by telephone and hold a focus group with paramedics, to find out what they think about the intervention. DISCUSSION: At the end of this study, we will make a recommendation about whether a full randomised controlled trial of paramedics obtaining blood cultures and administering IV antibiotics for sepsis is warranted, and if so, we will develop a proposal for research funding in order to take the work forward. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN, ISRCTN36856873.

Non-accidental non-fatal poisonings attended by emergency ambulance crews: an observational study of data sources and epidemiology.

BACKGROUND: Non-accidental non-fatal poisoning (NANFP) is associated with high risk of repeat episodes and fatality. This cross-sectional study aims to describe the data sources and epidemiology of non-fatal poisonings (NFPs) presenting to the emergency ambulance service. METHODS: We assessed incidents of NFP across Wales from electronic ambulance call centre records and paper records completed by attending ambulance crews, December 2007 to February 2008. We descriptively analysed data completed by attending crews. RESULTS: 92 331 calls were made to the ambulance call centre, of which 3923 (4.2%) were coded as 'overdose' or 'poisoning'. During the same period, ambulance crews recorded 1827 attended NANFP incidents in those categories, of which 1287 (70.4%) had been identified in the call centre. 76.1% (1356/1782) were aged 15-44 years and 54.2% (991/1827) were female. 75.0% (1302/1753) of incidents occurred in areas from the lower 2 quintiles of deprivation in Wales. Substance taken was reported in 90% of cases (n=1639). Multiple ingestion was common (n=886, 54.1%). Psychotropic was the most frequently taken group of substances (n=585, 32.0%) and paracetamol (n=484, 26.5%) was the most frequently taken substance prehospital. Almost half of patients had taken alcohol alongside other substances (n=844, 46.2%). Naloxone was the most frequently administered treatment (n=137, 7.5%). Only 142/1827 (7.8%) patients were not transported to hospital, of whom 4 were recorded to have been given naloxone. CONCLUSIONS: We report new data on the epidemiology of NFP across substance types at national level, highlighting deficiencies in information systems and high levels of multiple ingestion. In order to develop policy and practice for this patient group prehospital and further along the care pathway, information systems need to be developed to allow accurate routine monitoring of volume, presentation and outcomes.

Community-based interventions to prevent fatal overdose from illegal drugs: a systematic review protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Drug overdose is the most frequent cause of death among people who misuse illegal drugs. People who inject these drugs are 14-17 times more likely to die than their non-drug using peers. Various strategies to reduce drug-related deaths have failed to meet target reductions. Research into community-based interventions for preventing drug overdose deaths is promising. This review seeks to identify published studies describing community-based interventions and to evaluate their effectiveness at reducing drug overdose deaths. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will systematically search key electronic databases using a search strategy which groups terms into four facets: (1) Overdose event, (2) Drug classification, (3) Intervention and (4) Setting. Searches will be limited where possible to international literature published in English between 1998 and 2014. Data will be extracted by two independent reviewers using a predefined table adapted from the Cochrane Collaboration handbook. The quality of included studies will be evaluated using the Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias. We will conduct a meta-analysis for variables which can be compared across studies, using statistical methods to control for heterogeneity where appropriate. Where clinical or statistical heterogeneity prevents a valid numerical synthesis, we will employ a narrative synthesis to describe community-based interventions, their delivery and use and how effectively they prevent fatal overdoses. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: We will publish findings from this systematic review in a peer-reviewed scientific journal and present results at national and international conferences. It will be disseminated electronically and in print. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: PROSPERO CRD42015017833.