Contacts with primary and secondary healthcare before suicide by those under the care of mental health services: case-control, whole-population-based study using person-level linked routine data in Wales, UK during 2000-2015.

BACKGROUND: People under the care of mental health services are at increased risk of suicide. Existing studies are small in scale and lack comparisons. AIMS: To identify opportunities for suicide prevention and underpinning data enhancement in people with recent contact with mental health services. METHOD: This population-based study includes people who died by suicide in the year following a mental health services contact in Wales, 2001-2015 (cases), paired with similar patients who did not die by suicide (controls). We linked the National Confidential Inquiry into Suicide and Safety in Mental Health and the Suicide Information Database - Cymru with primary and secondary healthcare records. We present results of conditional logistic regression. RESULTS: We matched 1031 cases with 5155 controls. In the year before their death, 98.3% of cases were in contact with healthcare services, and 28.5% presented with self-harm. Cases had more emergency department contacts (odds ratio 2.4, 95% CI 2.1-2.7) and emergency hospital admissions (odds ratio 1.5, 95% CI 1.4-1.7), but fewer primary care contacts (odds ratio 0.7, 95% CI 0.6-0.9) and out-patient appointments (odds ratio 0.2, 95% CI 0.2-0.3) than controls. Odds ratios were larger in females than males for injury and poisoning (odds ratio: 3.3 (95% CI 2.5-4.5) v. 2.6 (95% CI 2.1-3.1)). CONCLUSIONS: We may be missing existing opportunities to intervene, particularly in emergency departments and hospital admissions with self-harm presentations and with unattributed self-harm, especially in females. Prevention efforts should focus on strengthening routine care contacts, responding to emergency contacts and better self-harm care. There are benefits to enhancing clinical audit systems with routinely collected data.

Self-harm in university students: A comparative analysis of data from the Multicentre Study of Self-harm in England.

BACKGROUND: Increases in poor mental health and suicide have been identified among university students in the UK. However, little is known about self-harm in this group. AIMS: To describe and identify care needs of university aged-students who self-harm via comparisons with an age-equivalent non-student group who self-harm. METHODS: Observational cohort data from The Multicentre Study of Self-harm in England were used to investigate students aged 18 to 24 years who presented to emergency departments for self-harm, 2003 to 2016. Data were collected via clinician reports and medical records from five hospitals in three English regions. Characteristics, rates, repetition, and mortality outcomes were investigated. RESULTS: The student sample included 3491 individuals (983, 28.2 % men; 2507, 71.8 % women; 1 unknown) compared to 7807 (3342, 42.8 % men; 4465, 57.2 % women) non-students. Self-harm increased over time in students (IRR 1.08, 95%CI 1.06-1.10, p < 0.01) but not in non-students (IRR 1.01, 95%CI 1.00-1.02, p = 0.15). There were differences in monthly distribution of self-harm with more presentations by students in October, November, and February. Characteristics were broadly similar, but students reported more problems with studying and mental health. Repetition (HR 0.78, 95%CI 0.71-0.86, p < 0.01) and mortality (HR 0.51, 95%CI 0.33-0.80, p < 0.01) were lower in students than non-students. CONCLUSIONS: Self-harm in students may be directly related the student experience, such as academic pressure, relocation, and the transition to independent living. Wellbeing initiatives targeting these factors, alongside mental health awareness training for academic and non-academic staff may help to support students at risk.

Evaluating a co-designed care bundle to improve patient safety at discharge from adult and adolescent mental health services (SAFER-MH and SAFER-YMH): protocol for a non-randomised feasibility study.

INTRODUCTION: Patients being discharged from inpatient mental wards often describe safety risks in terms of inadequate information sharing and involvement in discharge decisions. Through stakeholder engagement, we co-designed, developed and adapted two versions of a care bundle intervention, the SAFER Mental Health care bundle for adult and youth inpatient mental health settings (SAFER-MH and SAFER-YMH, respectively), that look to address these concerns through the introduction of new or improved processes of care. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Two uncontrolled before-and-after feasibility studies, where all participants will receive the intervention. We will examine the feasibility and acceptability of the SAFER-MH in inpatient mental health settings in patients aged 18 years or older who are being discharged and the feasibility and acceptability of the SAFER-YMH intervention in inpatient mental health settings in patients aged between 14 and 18 years who are being discharged. The baseline period and intervention periods are both 6 weeks. SAFER-MH will be implemented in three wards and SAFER-YMH in one or two wards, ideally across different trusts within England. We will use quantitative (eg, questionnaires, completion forms) and qualitative (eg, interviews, process evaluation) methods to assess the acceptability and feasibility of the two versions of the intervention. The findings will inform whether a main effectiveness trial is feasible and, if so, how it should be designed, and how many patients/wards should be included. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval was obtained from the National Health Service Cornwall and Plymouth Research Ethics Committee and Surrey Research Ethics Committee (reference: 22/SW/0096 and 22/LO/0404). Research findings will be disseminated with participating sites and shared in various ways to engage different audiences. We will present findings at international and national conferences, and publish in open-access, peer-reviewed journals.

Family involvement, patient safety and suicide prevention in mental healthcare: ethnographic study.

BACKGROUND: Family involvement has been identified as a key aspect of clinical practice that may help to prevent suicide. AIMS: To investigate how families can be effectively involved in supporting a patient accessing crisis mental health services. METHOD: A multi-site ethnographic investigation was undertaken with two crisis resolution home treatment teams in England. Data included 27 observations of clinical practice and interviews with 6 patients, 4 family members, and 13 healthcare professionals. Data were analysed using framework analysis. RESULTS: Three overarching themes described how families and carers are involved in mental healthcare. Families played a key role in keeping patients safe by reducing access to means of self-harm. They also provided useful contextual information to healthcare professionals delivering the service. However, delivering a home-based service can be challenging in the absence of a supportive family environment or because of practical problems such as the lack of suitable private spaces within the home. At an organisational level, service design and delivery can be adjusted to promote family involvement. CONCLUSIONS: Findings from this study indicate that better communication and dissemination of safety and care plans, shared learning, signposting to carer groups and support for carers may facilitate better family involvement. Organisationally, offering flexible appointment times and alternative spaces for appointments may help improve services for patients.

The characteristics, life problems and clinical management of older adults who self-harm: Findings from the multicentre study of self-harm in England.

BACKGROUND: Older adults have a high risk of suicide following self-harm. Contemporary information on self-harm in this population is needed to inform care provision. OBJECTIVES: To examine subgroup differences in the incidence of self-harm, sociodemographic and clinical characteristics, preceding life problems and outcomes in individuals aged 60 years and over presenting to hospital following self-harm. METHOD: Data on Emergency Department (ED) presentations for self-harm from 2003 to 2016 from three centres in the Multicentre Study of Self-Harm in England were analysed. Changes in self-harm rates were examined using Poisson regression. Univariable logistic regression was used to investigate factors associated with 12-month self-harm repetition. RESULTS: There were 3850 presentations for self-harm by 2684 individuals aged 60 years and over. Self-harm rates increased over time for 60-74-year-old men (Incident Rate Ratio = 1.04, 95% Confidence Interval 1.02-1.06, p < 0.0001). Problems most frequently reported to have preceded self-harm were mental health (40.5%) and physical health (38.3%) concerns. Problems with alcohol, finances, employment and relationship with partner were found more frequently in 60-74-year-olds compared with those aged over 74 years. Physical health problems were common with increasing age, as were problems with alcohol for men. One in ten (10.8%) individuals presented to hospital with self-harm within 12 months of their index presentation. CONCLUSIONS: Self-harm-related ED attendances in older men have increased, particularly for men aged 60-74 years. Prevention and clinical management should involve a comprehensive psychosocial assessment to target common precipitants for the wide range of problems preceding self-harm and may include support with physical and mental wellbeing and advice on safer alcohol use.

Suicide numbers during the first 9-15 months of the COVID-19 pandemic compared with pre-existing trends: An interrupted time series analysis in 33 countries.

Background: Predicted increases in suicide were not generally observed in the early months of the COVID-19 pandemic. However, the picture may be changing and patterns might vary across demographic groups. We aimed to provide a timely, granular picture of the pandemic's impact on suicides globally. Methods: We identified suicide data from official public-sector sources for countries/areas-within-countries, searching websites and academic literature and contacting data custodians and authors as necessary. We sent our first data request on 22nd June 2021 and stopped collecting data on 31st October 2021. We used interrupted time series (ITS) analyses to model the association between the pandemic's emergence and total suicides and suicides by sex-, age- and sex-by-age in each country/area-within-country. We compared the observed and expected numbers of suicides in the pandemic's first nine and first 10-15 months and used meta-regression to explore sources of variation. Findings: We sourced data from 33 countries (24 high-income, six upper-middle-income, three lower-middle-income; 25 with whole-country data, 12 with data for area(s)-within-the-country, four with both). There was no evidence of greater-than-expected numbers of suicides in the majority of countries/areas-within-countries in any analysis; more commonly, there was evidence of lower-than-expected numbers. Certain sex, age and sex-by-age groups stood out as potentially concerning, but these were not consistent across countries/areas-within-countries. In the meta-regression, different patterns were not explained by countries' COVID-19 mortality rate, stringency of public health response, economic support level, or presence of a national suicide prevention strategy. Nor were they explained by countries' income level, although the meta-regression only included data from high-income and upper-middle-income countries, and there were suggestions from the ITS analyses that lower-middle-income countries fared less well. Interpretation: Although there are some countries/areas-within-countries where overall suicide numbers and numbers for certain sex- and age-based groups are greater-than-expected, these countries/areas-within-countries are in the minority. Any upward movement in suicide numbers in any place or group is concerning, and we need to remain alert to and respond to changes as the pandemic and its mental health and economic consequences continue. Funding: None.

Suicide rates amongst individuals from ethnic minority backgrounds: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Background: Existing evidence suggests that some individuals from ethnic minority backgrounds are at increased risk of suicide compared to their majority ethnic counterparts, whereas others are at decreased risk. We aimed to estimate the absolute and relative risk of suicide in individuals from ethnic minority backgrounds globally. Methods: Databases (Medline, Embase, and PsycInfo) were searched for epidemiological studies between 01/01/2000 and 3/07/2020, which provided data on absolute and relative rates of suicide amongst ethnic minority groups. Studies reporting on clinical or specific populations were excluded. Pairs of reviewers independently screened titles, abstracts, and full texts. We used random effects meta-analysis to estimate overall, sex, location, migrant status, and ancestral origin, stratified pooled estimates for absolute and rate ratios. PROSPERO registration: CRD42020197940. Findings: A total of 128 studies were included with 6,026,103 suicide deaths in individuals from an ethnic minority background across 31 countries. Using data from 42 moderate-high quality studies, we estimated a pooled suicide rate of 12·1 per 100,000 (95% CIs 8·4-17·6) in people from ethnic minority backgrounds with a broad range of estimates (1·2-139·7 per 100,000). There was weak statistical evidence from 51 moderate-high quality studies that individuals from ethnic minority groups were more likely to die by suicide (RR 1·3 95% CIs 0·9-1·7) with again a broad range amongst studies (RR 0·2-18·5). In our sub-group analysis we only found evidence of elevated risk for indigenous populations (RR: 2·8 95% CIs 1·9-4·0; pooled rate: 23·2 per 100,000 95% CIs 14·7-36·6). There was very substantial heterogeneity (I2  > 98%) between studies for all pooled estimates. Interpretation: The homogeneous grouping of individuals from ethnic minority backgrounds is inappropriate. To support suicide prevention in marginalised groups, further exploration of important contextual differences in risk is required. It is possible that some ethnic minority groups (for example those from indigenous backgrounds) have higher rates of suicide than majority populations. Funding: No specific funding was provided to conduct this research. DK is funded by Wellcome Trust and Elizabeth Blackwell Institute Bristol. Matthew Spittal is a recipient of an Australian Research Council Future Fellowship (project number FT180100075) funded by the Australian Government. Rebecca Musgrove is funded by the NIHR Greater Manchester Patient Safety Translational Research Centre (PSTRC-2016-003).

Self-harm in people experiencing homelessness: investigation of incidence, characteristics and outcomes using data from the Multicentre Study of Self-Harm in England.

BACKGROUND: People who experience homelessness are thought to be at high risk of suicide, but little is known about self-harm in this population. AIMS: To examine characteristics and outcomes in people experiencing homelessness who presented to hospital following self-harm. METHOD: Data were collected via specialist assessments and/or hospital patient records from emergency departments in Manchester, Oxford and Derby, UK. Data were collected from 1 January 2000 to 31 December 2016, with mortality follow-up via data linkage with NHS Digital to 31 December 2019. Trend tests estimated change in self-harm over time; descriptive statistics described characteristics associated with self-harm. Twelve-month repetition and long-term mortality were analysed using Cox proportional hazards models and controlled for age and gender. RESULTS: There were 4841 self-harm presentations by 3270 people identified as homeless during the study period. Presentations increased after 2010 (IRR = 1.09, 95% CI 1.04-1.14, P < 0.001). People who experienced homelessness were more often men, White, aged under 54 years, with a history of previous self-harm and contact with psychiatric services. Risk of repetition was higher than in domiciled people (HR = 2.05, 95% CI 1.94-2.17, P < 0.001), as were all-cause mortality (HR = 1.45, 95% CI 1.32-1.59. P < 0.001) and mortality due to accidental causes (HR = 2.93, 95% CI 2.41-3.57, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: People who self-harm and experience homelessness have more complex needs and worse outcomes than those who are domiciled. Emergency department contact presents an opportunity to engage people experiencing homelessness with mental health, drug and alcohol, medical and housing services, as well as other sources of support.

Translating promise into practice: a review of machine learning in suicide research and prevention.

In ever more pressured health-care systems, technological solutions offering scalability of care and better resource targeting are appealing. Research on machine learning as a technique for identifying individuals at risk of suicidal ideation, suicide attempts, and death has grown rapidly. This research often places great emphasis on the promise of machine learning for preventing suicide, but overlooks the practical, clinical implementation issues that might preclude delivering on such a promise. In this Review, we synthesise the broad empirical and review literature on electronic health record-based machine learning in suicide research, and focus on matters of crucial importance for implementation of machine learning in clinical practice. The challenge of preventing statistically rare outcomes is well known; progress requires tackling data quality, transparency, and ethical issues. In the future, machine learning models might be explored as methods to enable targeting of interventions to specific individuals depending upon their level of need-ie, for precision medicine. Primarily, however, the promise of machine learning for suicide prevention is limited by the scarcity of high-quality scalable interventions available to individuals identified by machine learning as being at risk of suicide.

Primary care clinical management following self-harm during the first wave of COVID-19 in the UK: population-based cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: A substantial reduction in self-harm recorded in primary care occurred during the first wave of COVID-19 but effects on primary care management of self-harm are unknown. Our objectives were to examine the impact of COVID-19 on clinical management within 3 months of an episode of self-harm. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: UK primary care. PARTICIPANTS: 4238 patients with an index episode of self-harm recorded in UK primary care during the COVID-19 first-wave period (10 March 2020-10 June 2020) compared with 48 739 patients in a prepandemic comparison period (10 March-10 June, 2010-2019). OUTCOME MEASURES: Using data from the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink, we compared cohorts of patients with an index self-harm episode recorded during the prepandemic period versus the COVID-19 first-wave period. Patients were followed up for 3 months to capture subsequent general practitioner (GP)/practice nurse consultation, referral to mental health services and psychotropic medication prescribing. We examined differences by gender, age group and Index of Multiple Deprivation quintile. RESULTS: Likelihood of having at least one GP/practice nurse consultation was broadly similar (83.2% vs 80.3% in the COVID-19 cohort). The proportion of patients referred to mental health services in the COVID-19 cohort (4.2%) was around two-thirds of that in the prepandemic cohort (6.1%). Similar proportions were prescribed psychotropic medication within 3 months in the prepandemic (54.0%) and COVID-19 first-wave (54.9%) cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the challenges experienced by primary healthcare teams during the initial COVID-19 wave, prescribing and consultation patterns following self-harm were broadly similar to prepandemic levels. We found no evidence of widening of digital exclusion in terms of access to remote consultations. However, the reduced likelihood of referral to mental health services warrants attention. Accessible outpatient and community services for people who have self-harmed are required as the COVID-19 crisis recedes and the population faces new challenges to mental health.

Life problems in children and adolescents who self-harm: findings from the multicentre study of self-harm in England.

BACKGROUND: Self-harm, a significant and increasing global problem in children and adolescents, is often repeated and is associated with risk of future suicide. To identify potential interventions, we need to understand the life problems faced by children and adolescents, and by sub-groups of younger people who self-harm. Our aims were to include the following: (a) investigate the type and frequency of life problems in a large sample of children and adolescents who self-harmed. (b) Examine whether problems differ between those who repeat self-harm and those who do not. METHODS: We analysed data for 2000 to 2013 (follow up until 2014) from the Multicentre Study of Self-harm in England on individuals aged 11 to 18 years who presented to one of the five study hospitals following self-harm and received a psychosocial assessment including questions about problems, which precipitated self-harm. RESULTS: In 5648 patients (12,261 self-harm episodes), (75.5% female, mean age 16.1 years) the most frequently reported problems at first episode of self-harm were family problems. Problems around study/employment/study and relationships with friends also featured prominently. The types of problems that precede self-harm differed between late childhood/early adolescence. Abuse, mental health problems and legal problems significantly predicted repeat self-harm for females. CONCLUSION: The most common problems reported by both genders were social/interpersonal in nature, indicating the need for relevant services embedded in the community (e.g. in schools/colleges). Self-harm assessment and treatment choices for children and adolescents must take age and gender into account. To prevent future self-harm, individualised supports and services are particularly needed for abuse, mental health and legal problems.

Association of SARS-CoV-2 Infection With Psychological Distress, Psychotropic Prescribing, Fatigue, and Sleep Problems Among UK Primary Care Patients.

Importance: Infection with SARS-CoV-2 is associated with fatigue and sleep problems long after the acute phase of COVID-19. In addition, there are concerns of SARS-CoV-2 infection causing psychiatric illness; however, evidence of a direct effect is inconclusive. Objective: To assess risk of risk of incident or repeat psychiatric illness, fatigue, or sleep problems following SARS-CoV-2 infection and to analyze changes according to demographic subgroups. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study assembled matched cohorts using the Clinical Practice Research Datalink Aurum, a UK primary care registry of 11 923 499 individuals aged 16 years or older. Patients were followed-up for up to 10 months, from February 1 to December 9, 2020. Individuals with less than 2 years of historical data or less than 1 week follow-up were excluded. Individuals with positive results on a SARS-CoV-2 test without prior mental illness or with anxiety or depression, psychosis, fatigue, or sleep problems were matched with up to 4 controls based on sex, general practice, and year of birth. Controls were individuals who had negative SARS-CoV-2 test results. Data were analyzed from January to July 2021. Exposure: SARS-CoV-2 infection, determined via polymerase chain reaction testing. Main Outcomes and Measures: Cox proportional hazard models estimated the association between a positive SARS-CoV-2 test result and subsequent psychiatric morbidity (depression, anxiety, psychosis, or self-harm), sleep problems, fatigue, or psychotropic prescribing. Models adjusted for comorbidities, ethnicity, smoking, and body mass index. Results: Of 11 923 105 eligible individuals (6 011 020 [50.4%] women and 5 912 085 [49.6%] men; median [IQR] age, 44 [30-61] years), 232 780 individuals (2.0%) had positive result on a SARS-CoV-2 test. After applying selection criteria, 86 922 individuals were in the matched cohort without prior mental illness, 19 020 individuals had prior anxiety or depression, 1036 individuals had psychosis, 4152 individuals had fatigue, and 4539 individuals had sleep problems. After adjusting for observed confounders, there was an association between positive SARS-CoV-2 test results and psychiatric morbidity (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 1.83; 95% CI, 1.66-2.02), fatigue (aHR, 5.98; 95% CI, 5.33-6.71), and sleep problems (aHR, 3.16; 95% CI, 2.64-3.78). However, there was a similar risk of incident psychiatric morbidity for those with a negative SARS-CoV-2 test results (aHR, 1.71; 95% CI, 1.65-1.77) and a larger increase associated with influenza (aHR, 2.98; 95% CI, 1.55-5.75). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study of individuals registered at an English primary care practice during the pandemic, there was consistent evidence that SARS-CoV-2 infection was associated with increased risk of fatigue and sleep problems. However, the results from the negative control analysis suggest that unobserved confounding may be responsible for at least some of the positive association between COVID-19 and psychiatric morbidity.

'Relieved to be seen'-patient and carer experiences of psychosocial assessment in the emergency department following self-harm: qualitative analysis of 102 free-text survey responses.

OBJECTIVES: We sought to explore patient and carer experiences of psychosocial assessments following presentations to hospital after self-harm. DESIGN: Thematic analysis of free-text responses to an open-ended online survey. SETTING: Between March and November 2019, we recruited 88 patients (82% women) and 14 carers aged ≥18 years from 16 English mental health trusts, community organisations, and via social media. RESULTS: Psychosocial assessments were experienced as helpful on some occasions but harmful on others. Participants felt better, less suicidal and less likely to repeat self-harm after good-quality compassionate and supportive assessments. However, negative experiences during the assessment pathway were common and, in some cases, contributed to greater distress, less engagement and further self-harm. Participants reported receiving negative and stigmatising comments about their injuries. Others reported that they were refused medical care or an anaesthetic. Stigmatising attitudes among some mental health staff centred on preconceived ideas over self-harm as a 'behavioural issue', inappropriate use of services and psychiatric diagnosis. CONCLUSION: Our findings highlight important patient experiences that can inform service provision and they demonstrate the value of involving patients/carers throughout the research process. Psychosocial assessments can be beneficial when empathetic and collaborative but less helpful when overly standardised, lacking in compassion and waiting times are unduly long. Patient views are essential to inform practice, particularly given the rapidly changing service context during and after the COVID-19 emergency.

Suicide trends in the early months of the COVID-19 pandemic: an interrupted time-series analysis of preliminary data from 21 countries.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic is having profound mental health consequences for many people. Concerns have been expressed that, at their most extreme, these consequences could manifest as increased suicide rates. We aimed to assess the early effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on suicide rates around the world. METHODS: We sourced real-time suicide data from countries or areas within countries through a systematic internet search and recourse to our networks and the published literature. Between Sept 1 and Nov 1, 2020, we searched the official websites of these countries' ministries of health, police agencies, and government-run statistics agencies or equivalents, using the translated search terms "suicide" and "cause of death", before broadening the search in an attempt to identify data through other public sources. Data were included from a given country or area if they came from an official government source and were available at a monthly level from at least Jan 1, 2019, to July 31, 2020. Our internet searches were restricted to countries with more than 3 million residents for pragmatic reasons, but we relaxed this rule for countries identified through the literature and our networks. Areas within countries could also be included with populations of less than 3 million. We used an interrupted time-series analysis to model the trend in monthly suicides before COVID-19 (from at least Jan 1, 2019, to March 31, 2020) in each country or area within a country, comparing the expected number of suicides derived from the model with the observed number of suicides in the early months of the pandemic (from April 1 to July 31, 2020, in the primary analysis). FINDINGS: We sourced data from 21 countries (16 high-income and five upper-middle-income countries), including whole-country data in ten countries and data for various areas in 11 countries). Rate ratios (RRs) and 95% CIs based on the observed versus expected numbers of suicides showed no evidence of a significant increase in risk of suicide since the pandemic began in any country or area. There was statistical evidence of a decrease in suicide compared with the expected number in 12 countries or areas: New South Wales, Australia (RR 0·81 [95% CI 0·72-0·91]); Alberta, Canada (0·80 [0·68-0·93]); British Columbia, Canada (0·76 [0·66-0·87]); Chile (0·85 [0·78-0·94]); Leipzig, Germany (0·49 [0·32-0·74]); Japan (0·94 [0·91-0·96]); New Zealand (0·79 [0·68-0·91]); South Korea (0·94 [0·92-0·97]); California, USA (0·90 [0·85-0·95]); Illinois (Cook County), USA (0·79 [0·67-0·93]); Texas (four counties), USA (0·82 [0·68-0·98]); and Ecuador (0·74 [0·67-0·82]). INTERPRETATION: This is the first study to examine suicides occurring in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic in multiple countries. In high-income and upper-middle-income countries, suicide numbers have remained largely unchanged or declined in the early months of the pandemic compared with the expected levels based on the pre-pandemic period. We need to remain vigilant and be poised to respond if the situation changes as the longer-term mental health and economic effects of the pandemic unfold. FUNDING: None.

Evaluating the impact of patient and carer involvement in suicide and self-harm research: A mixed-methods, longitudinal study protocol.

BACKGROUND: Patient and public involvement (PPI) is becoming more commonplace in mental health research. There are strong moral and ethical arguments for good quality PPI. Few studies have documented and evaluated PPI in self-harm and suicide research. Inconsistent reporting of PPI makes it difficult to discern practices that deliver quality, effective and meaningful involvement. It is important to understand and address emotional support needs of PPI members contributing to sensitive topics such as suicide and self-harm. Therefore, this study will examine the effect of PPI on self-harm and suicide research and explore patients', carers' and researchers' experiences and views in relation to the quality of PPI practice and provision of appropriate support for PPI members. METHODS: This protocol outlines the longitudinal, mixed methodological approach that will be taken. Qualitative and quantitative data will be collected via baseline and repeated questionnaires, document review and semi-structured interviews. Both PPI members and researchers will be invited to participate in this study. The two-year data collection period will enable evaluation of PPI throughout the entire research cycle. An integrated approach will be taken to data analysis, using inductive thematic analysis and descriptive and repeated measures analyses, to address specified study aims. DISSEMINATION: Findings from this study will inform practical guidance to support self-harm and suicide researchers in effectively involving people with experiential knowledge in their research. Analyses will offer insight into the effect of PPI throughout the research process and assess changes in PPI members' and researchers' experiences of involvement across a two-year period.

Paracetamol self-poisoning: Epidemiological study of trends and patient characteristics from the multicentre study of self-harm in England.

BACKGROUND: Paracetamol is frequently used for intentional self-poisoning, especially in the UK, despite pack size restrictions introduced in 1998. Knowing more about paracetamol self-poisoning may identify further approaches to prevention. METHODS: We used data from the Multicentre Study of Self-harm in England for 2004-2014 to calculate incidence rates of presentations to Emergency Departments following self-poisoning with pure paracetamol alone. National estimates for England for 2011-2014 were extrapolated using indirect age-standardised rates. The characteristics of individuals taking paracetamol overdoses and the size of the overdoses were investigated. RESULTS: A third of 54,863 intentional overdoses presenting to the five Emergency Departments involved paracetamol without other drugs (N = 18,011), taken by 13,171 individuals (63.4% female).  The proportion of paracetamol self-poisonings was similar in the three centres. Extrapolation suggested there were approximately 50,000 paracetamol overdoses in England annually during 2011-2014. Females had higher rates of paracetamol overdose than males.  Males and older individuals took larger overdoses.  Nearly a quarter of individuals (24.2%) consumed more than 32 tablets. Alcohol was involved in 53.7% of paracetamol overdoses. LIMITATIONS: Data were collected in three centres with predominantly urban populations. Extrapolation from local to national rates should be interpreted with caution. CONCLUSIONS: Paracetamol overdose remains a major problem in the UK. It is more common in females and younger patients, but males and older patients consume larger overdoses. Consideration should be given to further restriction in pack sizes and sources of sales, in keeping with those of several other European countries.

Diagnosis of physical and mental health conditions in primary care during the COVID-19 pandemic: a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: To date, research on the indirect impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the health of the population and the health-care system is scarce. We aimed to investigate the indirect effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on general practice health-care usage, and the subsequent diagnoses of common physical and mental health conditions in a deprived UK population. METHODS: We did a retrospective cohort study using routinely collected primary care data that was recorded in the Salford Integrated Record between Jan 1, 2010, and May 31, 2020. We extracted the weekly number of clinical codes entered into patient records overall, and for six high-level categories: symptoms and observations, diagnoses, prescriptions, operations and procedures, laboratory tests, and other diagnostic procedures. Negative binomial regression models were applied to monthly counts of first diagnoses of common conditions (common mental health problems, cardiovascular and cerebrovascular disease, type 2 diabetes, and cancer), and corresponding first prescriptions of medications indicative of these conditions. We used these models to predict the expected numbers of first diagnoses and first prescriptions between March 1 and May 31, 2020, which were then compared with the observed numbers for the same time period. FINDINGS: Between March 1 and May 31, 2020, 1073 first diagnoses of common mental health problems were reported compared with 2147 expected cases (95% CI 1821 to 2489) based on preceding years, representing a 50·0% reduction (95% CI 41·1 to 56·9). Compared with expected numbers, 456 fewer diagnoses of circulatory system diseases (43·3% reduction, 95% CI 29·6 to 53·5), and 135 fewer type 2 diabetes diagnoses (49·0% reduction, 23·8 to 63·1) were observed. The number of first prescriptions of associated medications was also lower than expected for the same time period. However, the gap between observed and expected cancer diagnoses (31 fewer; 16·0% reduction, -18·1 to 36·6) during this time period was not statistically significant. INTERPRETATION: In this deprived urban population, diagnoses of common conditions decreased substantially between March and May 2020, suggesting a large number of patients have undiagnosed conditions. A rebound in future workload could be imminent as COVID-19 restrictions ease and patients with undiagnosed conditions or delayed diagnosis present to primary and secondary health-care services. Such services should prioritise the diagnosis and treatment of these patients to mitigate potential indirect harms to protect public health. FUNDING: National Institute of Health Research.

Impact of a national primary care pay-for-performance scheme on ambulatory care sensitive hospital admissions: a small-area analysis in England.

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to spatially describe hospital admissions for ambulatory care sensitive conditions (ACSC) in England at small-area geographical level and assess whether recorded practice performance under one of the world's largest primary care pay-for-performance schemes led to reductions in these potentially avoidable hospitalisations for chronic conditions incentivised in the scheme. SETTING: We obtained numbers of ACSC hospital admissions from the Hospital Episode Statistics database and information on recorded practice performance from the Quality and Outcomes Framework (QOF) administrative dataset for 2015/2016. We fitted three sets of negative binomial models to examine ecological associations between incentivised ACSC admissions, general practice performance, deprivation, urbanity and other sociodemographic characteristics. RESULTS: Hospital admissions for QOF incentivised ACSCs varied within and between regions, with clusters of high numbers of hospital admissions for incentivised ACSCs identified across England. Our models indicated a very small effect of the QOF on reducing admissions for incentivised ACSCs (0.993, 95% CI 0.990 to 0.995), however, other factors, such as deprivation (1.021, 95% CI 1.020 to 1.021) and urbanicity (0.875, 95% CI 0.862 to 0.887), were far more important in explaining variations in admissions for ACSCs. People in deprived areas had a higher risk of being admitted in hospital for an incentivised ACSC condition. CONCLUSION: Spatial analysis based on routinely collected data can be used to identify areas with high rates of potentially avoidable hospital admissions, providing valuable information for targeting resources and evaluating public health interventions. Our findings suggest that the QOF had a very small effect on reducing avoidable hospitalisation for incentivised conditions. Material deprivation and urbanicity were the strongest predictors of the variation in ACSC rates for all QOF incentivised conditions across England.

Healthcare professionals' implementation of national guidelines with patients who self-harm.

BACKGROUND: National guidelines for the short-term management of self-harm are aimed at healthcare professionals who may be involved in the care of people who have self-harmed. However, evidence from small-scale studies globally suggest there is a lack of awareness of such guidelines among some groups of healthcare professionals. For the first time in a large representative sample of patient-facing healthcare professionals, we aimed to identify: (a) which healthcare professionals are aware of guidelines for the management of self-harm; (b) the perceived availability of training; (c) the use of risk screening tools; and (d) the extent to which healthcare professionals implement guidelines for the management of self-harm. METHODS: 1020 UK healthcare professionals completed a cross-sectional survey online. RESULTS: 85.6% (873/1020) of the sample had heard of the national guidelines, but only 24.3% (248/1020) knew "a fair amount" or more about them. Of the respondents who had previously encountered a patient who had self-harmed or was at risk of repeat self-harm, the guidelines were implemented in fewer than 50% (M = 43.89%, SD = 38.79) of encounters. 31% (312/1020) of the sample had received training in managing self-harm and, contrary to guidelines, 2.25% (23/1020) of the sample had used self-harm risk screening tools. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings highlight a need to improve knowledge of self-harm management guidelines, and identifies professional groups where awareness and knowledge is currently low. Further work is required to develop interventions to change healthcare professional practice with respect to the implementation of self-harm management guidelines.