The Collaborative Assessment and Management of Suicidality compared to enhanced treatment as usual for inpatients who are suicidal: A randomized controlled trial.

Background: Although use of inpatient crisis hospital intervention for suicide risk is common, the evidence for inpatient treatments that reduce suicidal thoughts and behaviors is remarkably limited. To address this need, this novel feasibility pilot randomized controlled trial compared the use of the Collaborative Assessment and Management of Suicidality (CAMS) to enhanced treatment as usual (E-TAU) within a standard acute inpatient mental health care setting. Objectives: We hypothesized that CAMS would be more effective than E-TAU in reducing suicidal thoughts and behaviors. As secondary outcomes we also investigated depressive symptoms, general symptom burden, reasons for living, and quality of the therapeutic relationship. Methods: All patients were admitted due to acute suicidal thoughts or behaviors. They were randomly assigned to CAMS (n = 43) or E-TAU (n = 45) and assessed at four time points (admission, discharge, 1 month and 5 months after discharge). We used mixed-effects models, effect sizes, and reliable change analyses to compare improvements across and between treatment groups over time. Results: Intent-to-treat analyses of 88 participants [mean age 32.1, SD = 13.5; n = 47 (53%) females] showed that both groups improved over time across all outcome measures with no significant between-group differences in terms of change in suicidal ideation, depression, reasons for living, and distress. However, CAMS showed larger effect sizes across all measures; for treatment completers CAMS patients showed significant improvement in suicidal ideation (p = 0.01) in comparison to control patients. CAMS patients rated the therapeutic relationship significantly better (p = 0.02) than E-TAU patients and were less likely to attempt suicide within 4 weeks after discharge (p = 0.05). Conclusions: CAMS and E-TAU were both effective in reducing suicidal thoughts and symptom distress. Within this feasibility RCT the pattern of results was generally supportive of CAMS suggesting that inpatient use of CAMS is both feasible and promising. However, our preliminary results need further replication within well-powered multi-site randomized controlled trials. Trial registration: DRKS-ID/ICTRP-ID: DRKS00013727. The trial was retrospectively registered in the German Clinical Trials Register, registration code/ DRKS-ID: DRKS00013727 on 12.01.2018 and also in the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform of the World Health Organization (identical registration code).

Costs, benefits, and cost-benefit of Collaborative Assessment and Management of Suicidality versus enhanced treatment as usual.

Suicide rates have been steadily increasing in both the U.S. general population and military, with significant psychological and economic consequences. The purpose of the current study was to examine the economic costs and cost-benefit of the suicide-focused Collaborative Assessment and Management of Suicidality (CAMS) intervention versus enhanced treatment as usual (ETAU) in an active duty military sample using data from a recent randomized controlled trial of CAMS versus ETAU. The full intent-to-treat sample included 148 participants (mean age 26.8 years ± 5.9 SD years, 80% male, 53% White). Using a micro-costing approach, the cost of each condition was calculated at the individual level from a healthcare system perspective. Benefits were estimated at the individual level as cost savings in past-year healthcare expenditures based on direct care reimbursement rates. Cost-benefit was examined in the form of cost-benefit ratios and net benefit. Total costs, benefits, cost-benefit ratios, and net benefit were calculated and analyzed using general linear mixed modeling on multiply imputed datasets. Results indicated that treatment costs did not differ significantly between conditions; however, CAMS was found to produce significantly greater benefit in the form of decreased healthcare expenditures at 6-month follow-up. CAMS also demonstrated significantly greater cost-benefit ratios (i.e., benefit per dollar spent on treatment) and net-benefit (i.e., total benefit less the cost of treatment) at 12-month follow-up. The current study suggests that beyond its clinical effectiveness, CAMS may also convey potential economic advantages over usual care for the treatment of suicidal active duty service members. Our findings demonstrate cost savings in the form of reduced healthcare expenditures, which theoretically represent resources that can be reallocated toward other healthcare system needs, and thus lend support toward the overall value of CAMS.

The Collaborative Assessment and Management of Suicidality (CAMS) stabilization plan for working with patients with suicide risk.

The Collaborative Assessment and Management of Suicidality (CAMS) provides clinicians with an evidence-based suicide-focused therapeutic framework to help patients understand and manage suicidal thoughts and behaviors. A key component in CAMS suicide-focused treatment planning is the development and use of the CAMS Stabilization Plan (CSP). The CSP is used to ensure between-session safety and stability by helping patients learn to cope differently, enabling clinicians to care for suicidal patients on an outpatient basis, and thereby rendering suicidal-oriented coping obsolete. While implementing and maintaining the CSP, clinicians work to identify, target, and treat patient-identified suicidal drivers aimed at lowering the patient's suicide risk. The CSP employs a collaborative, flexible, and problem-focused approach creating a unique dynamic between clinician and patient as they work together to address the patient's suicidal struggle. CAMS allows clinicians to be flexible in their approach to treating suicidal behavior, utilizing techniques and tools they know, while providing them with a unique framework to engage their suicidal patients. Additionally, there is an overt and ongoing emphasis on encouraging patients to cultivate purpose and meaning in their lives with plans, goals, and hope for the future-ultimately leading patients to discover a life worth living, which is the final focus in CAMS-guided care. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

A model for the assessment, care, and treatment of suicidal risk within the military intelligence community.

This paper describes the development of a behavioral health and wellness model into the US Army Intelligence and Security Command (INSCOM) to address concerns about suicide within this community. In response to stresses existing within the intelligence community (IC), INSCOM partnered with the Army Public Health Center (APHC) to assess the health and wellbeing of Command personnel. A Community Health Assessment (CHA) survey was conducted (N = 2,704 Soldiers; N = 959 Civilians) that included focus groups across three installations and secondary source data. Six key areas were prioritized: suicide behavior, behavioral health access to care and health promotion, behavioral health stigma and maintaining clearances, workplace environment, sleep health, and overall fitness. Several actions were implemented to address the report's findings and recommendations. A Command Surgeon office was established within INSCOM. An INSCOM Health Assessment and Readiness Team (I-HART) was established. The Deputy Undersecretary of the Army provided support to address suicide within INSCOM by approving 4 highly qualified experts (HQE's) in behavioral health and clinical suicidology to provide research oversight and make recommendations. The Command General approved 8 behavioral health providers. There are planned research efforts within the command focusing on scalable and technology enabled care delivery to improve mental well-being and decrease suicides.

The influence of romantic relationships in assessment of suicide risk in U.S. Army soldiers.

Even though suicide theories highlight the importance of interpersonal connection, little is known about how romantic relationships impact suicide risk among military personal seeking treatment for suicidal thoughts and behaviors. Data were drawn from active-duty U.S. Soldier participants with suicidal ideation engaged in a suicide-focused treatment - the Collaborative Assessment and Management of Suicidality (CAMS). This exploratory study used a mixed-methods approach to examine two aims: (a) frequencies in which romantic relationships were endorsed in the context of the initial the Suicide Status Form (SSF; the multipurpose clinical tool used in CAMS) and (b) if having endorsed romantic relationships were implicated in their suicidal thoughts and self-inflicted injuries regardless of intent (i.e., non-suicidal self-injury and suicide attempts). We found that 76% of participants mentioned a romantic partner in at least one qualitative assessment item on the SSF. More specifically, 22.6% identified their romantic relationship as a reason for living or a reason for dying, and half of those participants indicated that their romantic relationship was both a reason for living and dying. Soldier participants who identified a current romantic relationship problem, were significantly more likely to have made a self-inflicted injury regardless of intent in their lifetime. Overall, suicidal thoughts and behaviors are intertwined with romantic relationship dynamics, and suicide-focused interventions may benefit from directly addressing these relationship issues with active-duty Soldiers.

A Randomized Controlled Trial of the Collaborative Assessment and Management of Suicidality (CAMS) Versus Treatment as Usual (TAU) for Suicidal College Students.

This randomized controlled trial compared the Collaborative Assessment and Management of Suicidality (CAMS) and Treatment as Usual (TAU) for suicidal college students within a feasibility trial. Sixty-two suicidal college students were randomized to CAMS (n = 33) or TAU (n = 29). We hypothesized that those receiving CAMS would show more improvement in suicide-related measures, and effects would be moderated by borderline personality disorder (BPD), prior suicide attempts, and age. Both treatment groups showed improvements in all outcome variables; CAMS had a significantly higher impact on depression and suicidal ideation when measured weekly during care and was more likely than TAU to decrease hopelessness among students with fewer BPD features, no suicide attempt history, and older age. Conversely, TAU did better for students with BPD features and history of multiple suicide attempts.

Collaborative Assessment and Management of Suicidality (CAMS) compared to enhanced treatment as usual (E-TAU) for suicidal patients in an inpatient setting: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The Collaborative Assessment and Management of Suicidality (CAMS) is a therapeutic framework that has been shown to reduce suicidal ideation and overall symptom distress. CAMS has not been previously evaluated in a standard acute inpatient mental health care setting with only short treatment times for suicidal patients. In this randomized controlled trial (RCT) we are investigating whether CAMS is more effective than Enhanced-Treatment as Usual (E-TAU) in reducing suicidal thoughts as primary outcome variable. We are also investigating depressive symptoms, general symptom relief, and the quality of the therapeutic alliance as secondary outcomes. METHODS/DESIGN: This RCT is designed as a single-center, two-armed, parallel group observer-blinded clinical effectiveness investigation. We are recruiting and randomizing 60 participants with different diagnoses, who are admitted as inpatients because of acute suicidal thoughts or behaviors into the Clinic for Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Ev. Hospital Bethel in Bielefeld, Germany. The duration of treatment will vary depending on patients' needs and clinical assessments ranging between 10 and 40 days. Patients are assessed four times, at admission, discharge, 1 month, and 5 months post-discharge. The primary outcome measure is the Beck Scale for Suicide Ideation. Other outcome measures are administered as assessment timepoints including severity of psychiatric symptoms, depression, reasons for living, and therapeutic relationship. DISCUSSION: This effectiveness study is being conducted on an acute ward in a psychiatric clinic where patients have multiple problems and diagnoses. Treatment is somewhat limited, and therapists have a large caseloads. The results of this study can thus be generalizable to a typical inpatient psychiatric hospital settings. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This clinical trial has been retrospectively registered with the German Clinical Trials Register; registration code/ DRKS-ID: DRKS00013727 (on January 12, 2018). In addition, the study was also registered with the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform of the World Health Organization (identical registration code). Registry Name: "Evaluation von CAMS versus TAU bei suizidalen Patienten - Ein stationärer RCT".

A novel engagement of suicidality in the emergency department: Virtual Collaborative Assessment and Management of Suicidality.

OBJECTIVE: A novel avatar system (Virtual Collaborative Assessment and Management of Suicidality System; V-CAMS) for suicidal patients and medical personnel in emergency departments (EDs) was developed and evaluated. V-CAMS facilitates the delivery of CAMS and other evidence-based interventions to reduce unnecessary hospitalization, readmissions, and suicide following an ED visit. METHOD: Using iterative user-centered design with 24 suicidal patients, an avatar prototype, "Dr. Dave" (based on Dr. Jobes) was created, along with other patient-facing tools; provider-facing tools, including a clinical decision support tool were also designed and tested to aid discharge disposition. RESULTS: Feasibility tests supported proof of concept. Suicidal patients affirmed the system's overall merit, positive Perception of Care, and acceptability; medical providers (n = 21) viewed the system as an efficient, effective, and safe method of improving care for suicidal ED patients and reducing unnecessary hospitalization. CONCLUSIONS: Technology tools including a patient-facing avatar and e-caring contacts, along with provider-facing tools may offer a powerful method of facilitating best-practice suicide prevention interventions and point-of-care tools for suicidal patients seeking ED services and their medical providers. Future directions include full development of V-CAMS and integration into a health electronic medical record and a rigorous randomized controlled trial to study its effectiveness.

Validating the Suicide Status Form for the Collaborative Assessment and Management of Suicidality in a Psychiatric Adolescent Sample.

BACKGROUND: For adults, the Collaborative Assessment and Management of Suicidality (CAMS; Jobes, (2006, Managing suicidal risk: A collaborative approach, New York, Guilford) and Jobes, (2016, Managing suicidal risk: A collaborative approach, New York, Guilford)) is a treatment framework with replicated evidenced-based support for effectiveness. The current study is a psychometric validation of the Suicide Status Form (SSF-IV), the main assessment and treatment planning tool for CAMS, in an adolescent psychiatric sample. METHODS: Data were collected from 100 adolescents, aged 12-17, in inpatient settings (mean age = 14.6; 67.5% female, 80% white). Adolescents were administered Part A of the SSF-IV, as well as measures of overall suicide risk (both explicit and implicit), mental pain, Stress, Agitation, reasons for living, and self-esteem. RESULTS: Confirmatory factor analysis found a two-factor model to fit the data best, with Psychological Pain, Stress, and Agitation loading on one factor, and Hopelessness and Self-Hate on another. All of the core SSF constructs except Stress were significantly correlated with concurrent measures, and SSF overall suicide risk was significantly correlated with self-reported and implicit suicidality. Adolescents with suicide attempt history reported significantly higher scores on most core SSF items compared to no attempt history. CONCLUSIONS: These results provide initial psychometric validation of the SSF for use with adolescents and indicate that it does not need to be adapted or modified for this age group.

Evaluation of Structured Assessment and Mediating Factors of Suicide-Focused Group Therapy for Veterans Recently Discharged from Inpatient Psychiatry.

The current study investigated the impact of adding the Suicide Status Form (SSF) to a suicide-focused group therapy for veterans recently discharged from an inpatient psychiatry setting. A sample of 141 veterans was enrolled and randomized into a Usual Assessment Group Therapy or SSF-Assessment Group Therapy. Participants completed interviews at baseline, 1, and 3 months. No significant differences were observed between groups regarding group attendance (IRR = 1.01, Std. Err = 0.08, 95% CI = 0.87, 1.18) or client satisfaction (ß = 0.23, Std. Err = 0.66, p = 0.73, d = -.25). No main effects were observed across the study on secondary outcomes of interest for suicidal ideation and overall symptom distress, although participants in both treatment conditions reported significant improvements on these outcomes over the course of the study. Patients in the Usual Assessment Group Therapy demonstrated greater reductions in overall symptom distress across the 3-month follow-up window (ß = 6.08, Std. Err = 2.04, p = 0.003; f2 = 0.05). Follow-up path analyses revealed that more frequent session attendance was significantly related to less suicidal ideation at 1-month, higher working alliance between individual members and group facilitators was associated with greater suicidal ideation at 1-month, and higher group cohesion among group members at 1-month was significantly associated with less thwarted belongingness at 1-month. Although the SSF did not improve the impact of an existing suicide-focused group therapy, the study findings support future research on group treatments for suicidal veterans.

The psychometric properties of the Collaborative Assessment and Management of Suicidality rating scale.

OBJECTIVE: The CAMS Rating Scale (CRS) is an adherence measure for the Collaborative Assessment and Management of Suicidality (CAMS), a suicide-specific clinical intervention. This study examined the ability of the CRS to assess adherence to CAMS. METHODS: Video-recorded therapy sessions of clinicians delivering either CAMS or Enhanced Care-As-Usual (E-CAU) were rated with the CRS. These ratings (N = 98) were used to evaluate criterion validity, internal consistency, and factor structure. RESULTS: Criterion validity and factor analyses did not support the organization of the CRS into its current subscales. Furthermore, the identified factor model and item-level statistics revealed weak CRS items. Finally, internal consistency was higher among CAMS clinicians than among clinicians delivering E-CAU. CONCLUSION: These results establish the CRS as a measure that can effectively assess the adherence to CAMS in its current form. Potential revisions to future iterations of the CRS are discussed.

Relative Impact of Risk Factors, Thwarted Belongingness, and Perceived Burdensomeness on Suicidal Ideation in Veteran Service Members.

OBJECTIVE: We tested the associations between individualized risk factors, empirically validated constructs specific to suicide risk (i.e., thwarted belongingness and perceived burdensomeness, and two methods for conceptualizing suicidal ideation based on Suicide Index Score (SIS) and overall severity score of the Beck Scale for Suicide Ideation [BSS]). METHOD: The current study included a sample of 134 suicidal Veterans who were recruited from an inpatient psychiatry unit of a Veterans Affairs Medical Center. Participants completed the BSS, Interpersonal Needs Questionnaire, Outcome Questionnaire-45.2, Alcohol Use Disorder Identification Test, Drug Abuse Screening Test, and abbreviated versions of the Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Checklist-Military version (PCL-M) and Insomnia Severity Index. We used ordinary least squares regression with bootstrapping to conduct analyses due to the skewed distributions observed in the suicidal ideation outcomes. RESULTS: Thwarted belongingness was the only statistically significant correlate of the SIS, indicating a stronger desire to be dead than alive as Veterans perceived themselves as being increasingly disconnected and isolated from others (B = 0.36, standard error [SE] = 0.01, p = 0.005). In contrast, greater overall severity scores on the BSS were associated with higher ratings on the PCL-M (B = 0.21, SE = 0.07, p = 0.02) and for thwarted belongingness (B = 0.27, SE = 0.09, p = 0.04). Problematic alcohol use was significantly associated with lower overall severity scores (B = -.27, SE = 1.17, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Findings may inform clinical strategies for conceptualizing and targeting factors associated with suicidal risk.

A Randomized Controlled Trial of the Collaborative Assessment and Management of Suicidality versus Enhanced Care as Usual With Suicidal Soldiers.

OBJECTIVE: This study describes a randomized controlled trial called "Operation Worth Living" (OWL) which compared the use of the Collaborative Assessment and Management of Suicidality (CAMS) to enhanced care as usual (E-CAU). We hypothesized that CAMS would be more effective than E-CAU for reducing suicidal ideation (SI) and suicide attempts (SA), along with secondary behavioral health and health care utilization markers for U.S. Army Soldier outpatients with significant SI (i.e., > 13 on Beck's Scale for Suicide Ideation). METHOD: Study participants were 148 Soldiers who presented to a military outpatient behavioral health clinic. There were 73 Soldiers in the experimental arm of the trial who received adherent CAMS; 75 Soldiers received E-CAU. Nine a-priori treatment outcomes (SI, past year SA, suicide-related emergency department (ED) admits, behavioral health-related ED admits, suicide-related inpatient psychiatric unit (IPU) days, behavioral health-related IPU days, mental health, psychiatric distress, resiliency) were measured through assessments at Baseline and at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months post-Baseline (with a 78% retention of intent-to-treat participants at 12 months). RESULTS: Soldiers in both arms of the trial responded to study treatments in terms of all primary and secondary outcomes (effect sizes ranged from 0.63 to 12.04). CAMS participants were significantly less likely to have any suicidal thoughts by 3 months in comparison to those in E-CAU (Cohen's d = 0.93, p=.028). CONCLUSIONS: Soldiers receiving CAMS and E-CAU significantly improved post-treatment. Those who received CAMS were less likely to report SI at 3 months; further group differences were not otherwise seen.

Impact of a Suicide-Specific Intervention within Inpatient Psychiatric Care: The Collaborative Assessment and Management of Suicidality.

A growing body of literature indicates that suicidal patients differ from other psychiatric patients with respect to specific psychological vulnerabilities and that suicide-specific interventions may offer benefits beyond conventional care. This naturalistic controlled-comparison trial (n = 52) examined outcomes of intensive psychiatric hospital treatment (mean length of stay 58.8 days), comparing suicidal patients who received individual therapy from clinicians utilizing the Collaborative Assessment and Management of Suicidality (CAMS) to patients whose individual therapists did not utilize CAMS. Propensity score matching was used to control for potential confounds, including age, sex, treatment unit, and severity of depression and suicidality. Results showed that both groups improved significantly over the course of hospitalization; however, the group receiving CAMS showed significantly greater improvement on measures specific to suicidal ideation and suicidal cognition. Results are discussed in terms of the potential advantages of treating suicide risk with a suicide-specific intervention to make inpatient psychiatric treatment more effective in reducing risk for future suicidal crises.

The DiaS trial: dialectical behavior therapy versus collaborative assessment and management of suicidality on self-harm in patients with a recent suicide attempt and borderline personality disorder traits - study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: In Denmark 8,000 to 10,000 people will attempt suicide each year. The Centre of Excellence in Suicide Prevention in the Capital Region of Denmark is treating patients with suicidal behavior, and a recent survey has shown that 30% of the patients are suffering from borderline personality disorder. The majority of patients (70% to 75%) with borderline personality disorder have a history of deliberate self-harm and 10% have a lifetime risk to die by suicide. The DiaS trial is comparing dialectical behavior therapy with collaborative assessment and management of suicidality-informed supportive psychotherapy, for the risk of repetition of deliberate self-harm in patients with a recent suicide attempt and personality traits within the spectrum of borderline personality disorder. Both treatments have previously shown effects in this group of patients on suicide ideation and self-harm compared with treatment as usual. METHODS/DESIGN: The trial is designed as a single-center, two-armed, parallel-group observer-blinded randomized clinical superiority trial. We will recruit 160 participants with a recent suicide attempt and at least two traits of the borderline personality disorder from the Centre of Excellence in Suicide Prevention, Capital Region of Denmark. Randomization will be performed though a centralized and computer-generated approach that conceals the randomization sequence. The interventions that are offered are a modified version of a dialectical behavior therapy program lasting 16 weeks versus collaborative assessment and management of suicidality-informed supportive psychotherapy, where the duration treatment will vary in accordance with established methods up to 16 weeks. The primary outcome measure is the ratio of deliberate self-harming acts including suicide attempts measured at week 28. Other exploratory outcomes are included such as severity of symptoms, suicide intention and ideation, depression, hopelessness, self-esteem, impulsivity, anger, and duration of respective treatments. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical Trial.gov: NCT01512602.

Association of positive responses to suicide screening questions with hospital admission and repeated emergency department visits in children and adolescents.

OBJECTIVES: Although validated suicide screening tools exist for use among children and adolescents presenting to emergency departments (EDs), the associations between screening positive for suicide risk and immediate psychiatric hospital admission or subsequent ED use, stratified by age, have not been examined. METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort study of a consecutive case series of patients aged 8 to 18 years presenting with psychiatric chief complaints during a 9-month period to a single urban tertiary care pediatric ED. Eligible patients were administered a subset of questions from the Risk of Suicide Questionnaire. Outcomes included the odds of psychiatric hospitalization at the index visit and repeated ED visits for psychiatric complaints within the following year, stratified by age. RESULTS: Of the 568 patients presenting during the study period, responses to suicide screening questions were available for 442 patients (78%). A total of 159 (36%) of 442 were hospitalized and 130 (29%) of 442 had 1 or more ED visits within the following year. The proportion of patients providing positive responses to 1 or more suicide screening questions did not differ between patients aged 8 to 12 years and those aged 13 to 18 years (77/154 [50%] vs 137/288 [48%], P = 0.63). A positive response to 1 or more of the questions was significantly associated with increased odds of psychiatric hospitalization in the older age group [adjusted odds ratio, 3.82; 95% confidence interval, 2.24-6.54) and with repeated visits to the ED in the younger age group (adjusted odds ratio, 3.55 95% confidence interval, 1.68-7.50). CONCLUSIONS: Positive responses to suicide screening questions were associated with acute psychiatric hospitalization and repeated ED visits. Suicide screening in a pediatric ED may identify children and adolescents with increased need of psychiatric resources.

The Collaborative Assessment and Management of Suicidality (CAMS): an evolving evidence-based clinical approach to suicidal risk.

The Collaborative Assessment and Management of Suicidality (CAMS) is an evidence-based clinical intervention that has significantly evolved over 25 years of clinical research. CAMS is best understood as a therapeutic framework that emphasizes a unique collaborative assessment and treatment planning process between the suicidal patient and clinician. This process is designed to enhance the therapeutic alliance and increase treatment motivation in the suicidal patient. Central to the CAMS approach is the use of the Suicide Status Form (SSF), which is a multipurpose clinical assessment, treatment planning, tracking, and outcome tool. The original development of CAMS was largely rooted in SSF-based quantitative and qualitative assessment of suicidal risk. As this line of research progressed, CAMS emerged as a problem-focused clinical intervention that is designed to target and treat suicidal "drivers" and ultimately eliminate suicidal coping. To date, CAMS (and the clinical use of the SSF) has been supported by six published correlational studies and one randomized clinical trial (RCT). Currently, two well-powered RCTs are under way, and various new CAMS-related projects are also being pursued. The clinical and empirical evolution of CAMS-how it was developed and what are the next steps for this clinical approach-are described here.

Collaborative assessment and management of suicidality in an inpatient setting: results of a pilot study.

Patients hospitalized for psychiatric reasons exhibit significantly elevated risk of suicide, yet the research literature contains very few outcome studies of interventions designed for suicidal inpatients. This pilot study examined the inpatient feasibility and effectiveness of The Collaborative Assessment and Management of Suicidality (CAMS), a structured evidence-based method for risk assessment and treatment planning (Jobes, 2006). The study used an open-trial, case-focused design to assess an inpatient adaptation of CAMS, spread over a period averaging 51 days. The intervention was provided via individual therapy to a convenience sample of 20 patients (16 females and four males, average age 36.9) who were hospitalized with recent histories of suicidal ideation and behavior. Results showed statistically and clinically significant reductions in depression, hopelessness, suicide cognitions, and suicidal ideation, as well as improvement on factors considered "drivers" of suicidality. Treatment effect sizes were in the large range (Cohen's d > .80) across several outcome measures, including suicidal ideation. Although these findings must be considered preliminary due to the lack of a randomized control group, they merit attention from clinicians working with patients at risk for suicide. This study also supports the feasibility of implementing a structured, suicide-specific intervention for at-risk patients in inpatient settings.

Collaborative assessment and management of suicidality (CAMS): feasibility trial for next-day appointment services.

BACKGROUND: Despite the ubiquity of suicidality in behavioral health settings, empirically supported interventions for suicidality are surprisingly rare. Given the importance of resolving suicidality and therapists' anxieties about treating suicidal patients, there is a clear need for innovative services and clinical approaches. The purpose of the current study was an attempt to address some of these needs by examining the feasibility and use of a new intervention called the "Collaborative Assessment and Management of Suicidality" (CAMS) within a "Next-Day Appointment" (NDA) outpatient treatment setting. METHODS: As part of a larger feasibility study, n = 32 suicidal patients were randomly assigned to CAMS care versus Enhanced Care as Usual (E-CAU) in an outpatient crisis intervention setting attached to a safety net hospital. Intent to treat suicidal patients were seen and assessed before, during, and after treatment (with follow-up assessments conducted at 2, 4, 6, and 12 months). RESULTS: The feasibility of using CAMS in the NDA setting was clear; both groups appeared to initially benefit from their respective treatments in terms of decreased suicidal ideation and overall symptom distress. Although patients rated both treatments favorably, the CAMS group had significantly higher satisfaction and better treatment retention than E-CAU. At 12 months post-treatment, CAMS patients showed significantly better and sustained reductions in suicidal ideation, overall symptom distress, and increased hope in comparison to E-CAU patients. CONCLUSIONS: CAMS was both feasible in this NDA setting and effective in treating suicidal ideation, distress, and hopelessness (particularly at 12 months followup).