Mobile Crisis Services: A Clinician Survey of Current Suicide Prevention Practices and Barriers to Care Delivery.

Mobile crisis teams (MCTs) deploy clinicians to assist individuals in acute crisis in the community. Little is known about the extent to which these teams provide evidence-based practices (EBPs) for suicide prevention nor the barriers they face. We surveyed 120 MCT clinicians across the United States about their: (1) use of suicide risk screening and assessment tools; (2) strategies used to address suicide risk (both EBPs and non-EBPs); and (3) perceived barriers to high-quality MCT services. Nearly all clinicians reported use of validated suicide screening tools and generic "safety planning." However, a sizeable minority also reported use of non-EBPs. Open-ended responses suggested many client/family-, clinician-, and systems-level barriers to MCT use of EBPs for suicide prevention. We identified several targets for future implementation efforts, including the need for de-implementation strategies to reduce use of ineffective and potentially harmful practices, and unique aspects of MCTs that require tailored implementation supports.

Cost comparison of in-person and telehealth modalities for a suicide safety planning group intervention: interim results from the "Project Life Force" randomized clinical trial.

Suicide prevention is a clinical priority for the US Veterans Health Administration. Evidence-based interventions, including developing a suicide safety plan, are recommended practices and are becoming more widespread. Adaptations to further augment safety planning include a manualized group intervention (Project Life Force, PLF) that combines safety planning with the teaching of skills to maximize use of the plan. A multi-year randomized controlled trial to test efficacy of PLF compared to treatment as usual is currently in progress. However, approximately a year into the study, in-person groups were converted to telehealth groups due to the COVID-19 pandemic. This study compares the per-veteran cost of PLF when delivered in-person versus by telehealth using preliminary trial data from the first 2.5 years of the trial. Cost to deliver PLF was obtained from the Veterans Health Administration's Managerial Cost Accounting data, which relies on activity-based costing. We found no significant differences in the average number of sessions or average group size between in-person and telehealth. However, the cost per group session was lower for the telehealth modality and this led to significant overall per-veteran savings. While efficacy data comparing from the two arms is still underway and we await the ongoing RCT results, our interim cost analysis highlights potential savings with the telehealth modality.

Building an Integrated Data Infrastructure to Examine the Spectrum of Suicide Risk Factors in Philadelphia Medicaid.

While there are many data-driven approaches to identifying individuals at risk of suicide, they tend to focus on clinical risk factors, such as previous psychiatric hospitalizations, and rarely include risk factors that occur in nonclinical settings, such as jails or emergency shelters. A better understanding of system-level encounters by individuals at risk of suicide could help inform suicide prevention efforts. In Philadelphia, we built a community-level data infrastructure that encompassed suicide death records, behavioral health claims, incarceration episodes, emergency housing episodes, and involuntary commitment petitions to examine a broader spectrum of suicide risk factors. Here, we describe the development of the data infrastructure, present key trends in suicide deaths in Philadelphia, and, for the Medicaid-eligible population, determine whether suicide decedents were more likely to interact with the behavioral health, carceral, and housing service systems compared to Medicaid-eligible Philadelphians who did not die by suicide. Between 2003 and 2018, there was an increase in the number of annual suicide deaths among Medicaid-eligible individuals, in part due to changes in Medicaid eligibility. There were disproportionately more suicide deaths among Black and Hispanic individuals who were Medicaid-eligible, who were younger on average, compared to suicide decedents who were never Medicaid-eligible. However, when we accounted for the racial and ethnic composition of the Medicaid population at large, we found that White individuals were four times as likely to die by suicide, while Asian, Black, Hispanic, and individuals of other races were less likely to die by suicide. Overall, 58% of individuals who were Medicaid-eligible and died by suicide had at least one Medicaid-funded behavioral health claim, 10% had at least one emergency housing episode, 25% had at least one incarceration episode, and 22% had at least one involuntary commitment. By developing a data infrastructure that can incorporate a broader spectrum of risk factors for suicide, we demonstrate how communities can harness administrative data to inform suicide prevention efforts. Our findings point to the need for suicide prevention in nonclinical settings such as jails and emergency shelters, and demonstrate important trends in suicide deaths in the Medicaid population.

Equitable implementation of S.A.F.E. Firearm: A multi-method pilot study.

Attention to health equity is critical in the implementation of firearm safety efforts. We present our operationalization of equity-oriented recommendations in preparation for launch of a hybrid effectiveness-implementation trial focused on firearm safety promotion in pediatric primary care as a universal suicide prevention strategy. In Step 1 of our process, pre-trial engagement with clinican partners and literature review alerted us that delivery of a firearm safety program may vary by patients' medical complexity, race, and ethnicity. In Step 2, we selected the Health Equity Implementation Framework to inform our understanding of contextual determinants (i.e., barriers and facilitators). In Step 3, we leveraged an implementation pilot across 5 pediatric primary care clinics in 2 health system sites to study signals of inequities. Eligible well-child visits for 694 patients and 47 clinicians were included. Our results suggested that medical complexity was not associated with program delivery. We did see potential signals of inequities by race and ethnicity but must interpret with caution. Though we did not initially plan to examine differences by sex assigned at birth, we discovered that clinicians may be more likely to deliver the program to parents of male than female patients. Seven qualitative interviews with clinicians provided additional context. In Step 4, we interrogated equity considerations (e.g., why and how do these inequities exist). In Step 5, we will develop a plan to probe potential inequities related to race, ethnicity, and sex in the fully powered trial. Our process highlights that prospective, rigorous, exploratory work is vital for equity-informed implementation trials.

Leveraging behavioral economics and implementation science to engage patients at risk for suicide in mental health treatment: a pilot study protocol.

BACKGROUND: Primary care is an ideal setting to connect individuals at risk for suicide to follow-up care; however, only half of the patients referred from the primary care attend an initial mental health visit. We aim to develop acceptable, feasible, low-cost, and effective new strategies to increase treatment initiation among at-risk individuals identified in primary care. METHODS: We will conduct a multi-phase, mixed-methods study. First, we will conduct a chart review study by using administrative data, including medical records, to identify characteristics of primary care patients at risk for suicide who do or do not attend an initial mental health visit following a referral. Second, we will conduct a mixed methods study by using direct observations and qualitative interviews with key stakeholders (N = 65) to understand barriers and facilitators to mental health service initiation among at-risk individuals. Stakeholders will include patients with suicidal ideation referred from primary care who do and do not attend a first mental health visit, primary care and behavioral health providers, and individuals involved in the referral process. We also will collect preliminary self-report and behavioral data regarding potential mechanisms of behavior change (i.e., self-regulation and social support) from patients. Third, we will leverage these findings, relevant frameworks, and the extant literature to conduct a multi-arm, non-randomized feasibility trial. During this trial, we will rapidly prototype and test strategies to support attendance at initial mental health visits. Strategies will be developed with subject matter experts (N = 10) and iteratively pilot tested (~5 patients per strategy) and refined. Research will be completed in the Penn Integrated Care Program (PIC), which includes fourteen primary care clinics in Philadelphia that provide infrastructure for electronic referrals, patient communication, and data access. DISCUSSION: We will leverage frameworks and methods from behavioral economics and implementation science to develop strategies to increase mental health treatment initiation among individuals at risk for suicide identified in primary care. This project will lead to an evaluation of these strategies in a fully powered randomized trial and contribute to improvements in access to and engagement in mental health services for individuals at risk for suicide. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05021224.

Do financial incentives increase mental health treatment engagement? A meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Engagement in mental health treatment is low, which can lead to poor outcomes. We evaluated the efficacy of offering patients financial incentives to increase their mental health treatment engagement, also referred to as contingency management. METHOD: We meta-analyzed studies offering financial incentives for mental health treatment engagement, including increasing treatment attendance, medication adherence, and treatment goal completion. Analyses were run within a multilevel framework. All study designs were included, and sensitivity analyses were run including only randomized and high-quality studies. RESULTS: About 80% of interventions incentivized treatment for substance use disorders. Financial incentives significantly increased treatment attendance (Hedges' g = 0.49, [0.33, 0.64], k = 30, I2 = 83.14), medication adherence (Hedges' g = 0.95, [0.47, 1.44], k = 6, I2 = 87.73), and treatment goal completion (Hedges' g = 0.61, [0.22, 0.99], k = 5, I2 = 60.55), including completing homework, signing treatment plans, and reducing problematic behavior. CONCLUSIONS: Financial incentives increase treatment engagement with medium to large effect sizes. We provide strong evidence for their effectiveness in increasing substance use treatment engagement and preliminary evidence for their effectiveness in increasing treatment engagement for other mental health disorders. Future research should prioritize testing the efficacy of incentivizing treatment engagement for mental health disorders aside from substance use. Research must also identify ways to incentivize treatment engagement that improve functioning and long-term outcomes and address ethical and systemic barriers to implementing these interventions. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

Developing implementation strategies for firearm safety promotion in paediatric primary care for suicide prevention in two large US health systems: a study protocol for a mixed-methods implementation study.

INTRODUCTION: The promotion of safe firearm practices, or firearms means restriction, is a promising but infrequently used suicide prevention strategy in the USA. Safety Check is an evidence-based practice for improving parental firearm safety behaviour in paediatric primary care. However, providers rarely discuss firearm safety during visits, suggesting the need to better understand barriers and facilitators to promoting this approach. This study, Adolescent Suicide Prevention In Routine clinical Encounters, aims to engender a better understanding of how to implement the three firearm components of Safety Check as a suicide prevention strategy in paediatric primary care. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The National Institute of Mental Health-funded Mental Health Research Network (MHRN), a consortium of 13 healthcare systems across the USA, affords a unique opportunity to better understand how to implement a firearm safety intervention in paediatric primary care from a system-level perspective. We will collaboratively develop implementation strategies in partnership with MHRN stakeholders. First, we will survey leadership of 82 primary care practices (ie, practices serving children, adolescents and young adults) within two MHRN systems to understand acceptability and use of the three firearm components of Safety Check (ie, screening, brief counselling around firearm safety and provision of firearm locks). Then, in collaboration with MHRN stakeholders, we will use intervention mapping and the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research to systematically develop and evaluate a multilevel menu of implementation strategies for promoting firearm safety as a suicide prevention strategy in paediatric primary care. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Study procedures have been approved by the University of Pennsylvania. Henry Ford Health System and Baylor Scott & White institutional review boards (IRBs) have ceded IRB review to the University of Pennsylvania IRB. Results will be submitted for publication in peer-reviewed journals.