Group brief cognitive behavioral therapy for suicide prevention compared to dialectal behavior therapy skills group for military service members: a study protocol of a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Suicide is a pressing matter for the military. Not only does it pose a health risk, but suicide also compromises operational readiness. Despite provision of suicide prevention clinical best practices, the Department of Defense suffers several challenges (e.g., clinician shortages) limiting the agency's ability to effectively respond to service member suicide. Implementation of evidence-based suicide-specific group therapy is a possible solution to service member well-being needs and system challenges. Service members can also gain coping skills useful beyond managing suicidal thoughts and behaviors. METHODS: This 2-arm non-inferiority randomized controlled trial compares a group therapy format of Brief Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (i.e., G-BCBT) with Dialectical Behavior Therapy (DBT) Skills Group. Both therapies are delivered in-person at a United States Naval Medical Center. Participants (N = 136) are active-duty service members with recent suicidal thoughts or suicidal behavior. Evaluation features electronically delivered questionnaires at baseline, after each treatment session, and at 3- and 6-month follow-up. DISCUSSION: The primary outcome concerns G-BCBT impacts on suicidal ideation. Secondary outcomes of interest are suicide attempt, psychological distress (e.g., symptoms of depression, anxiety), and self-regulatory skills (e.g., emotion regulation). We also examine self-regulatory skills as treatment moderators. Clinical trial strengths and limitations are reviewed. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study was registered at Clinicaltrials.gov (protocol NCT05401838).

External Validation and Updating of a Statistical Civilian-Based Suicide Risk Model in US Naval Primary Care.

Importance: Suicide remains an ongoing concern in the US military. Statistical models have not been broadly disseminated for US Navy service members. Objective: To externally validate and update a statistical suicide risk model initially developed in a civilian setting with an emphasis on primary care. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study used data collected from 2007 through 2017 among active-duty US Navy service members. The external civilian model was applied to every visit at Naval Medical Center Portsmouth (NMCP), its NMCP Naval Branch Health Clinics (NBHCs), and TRICARE Prime Clinics (TPCs) that fall within the NMCP area. The model was retrained and recalibrated using visits to NBHCs and TPCs and updated using Department of Defense (DoD)-specific billing codes and demographic characteristics, including expanded race and ethnicity categories. Domain and temporal analyses were performed with bootstrap validation. Data analysis was performed from September 2020 to December 2022. Exposure: Visit to US NMCP. Main Outcomes and Measures: Recorded suicidal behavior on the day of or within 30 days of a visit. Performance was assessed using area under the receiver operating curve (AUROC), area under the precision recall curve (AUPRC), Brier score, and Spiegelhalter z-test statistic. Results: Of the 260 583 service members, 6529 (2.5%) had a recorded suicidal behavior, 206 412 (79.2%) were male; 104 835 (40.2%) were aged 20 to 24 years; and 9458 (3.6%) were Asian, 56 715 (21.8%) were Black or African American, and 158 277 (60.7%) were White. Applying the civilian-trained model resulted in an AUROC of 0.77 (95% CI, 0.74-0.79) and an AUPRC of 0.004 (95% CI, 0.003-0.005) at NBHCs with poor calibration (Spiegelhalter P < .001). Retraining the algorithm improved AUROC to 0.92 (95% CI, 0.91-0.93) and AUPRC to 0.66 (95% CI, 0.63-0.68). Number needed to screen in the top risk tiers was 366 for the external model and 200 for the retrained model; the lower number indicates better performance. Domain validation showed AUROC of 0.90 (95% CI, 0.90-0.91) and AUPRC of 0.01 (95% CI, 0.01-0.01), and temporal validation showed AUROC of 0.75 (95% CI, 0.72-0.78) and AUPRC of 0.003 (95% CI, 0.003-0.005). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study of active-duty Navy service members, a civilian suicide attempt risk model was externally validated. Retraining and updating with DoD-specific variables improved performance. Domain and temporal validation results were similar to external validation, suggesting that implementing an external model in US Navy primary care clinics may bypass the need for costly internal development and expedite the automation of suicide prevention in these clinics.

A psychometric assessment of the Military Suicide Attitudes Questionnaire (MSAQ).

Suicide rates remain high among military populations. Stigmatizing beliefs about suicide contribute to the problem of heightened suicide risk as a deterrent for help-seeking. Measurement of military suicide stigma is therefore an important gap in the literature as a necessity toward the development of military suicide prevention programming. This paper assessed the factor structure, reliability, and validity of the Military Suicide Attitudes Questionnaire (MSAQ). Study 1 featured secondary analysis of a suicide risk dataset from active duty treatment-seeking military personnel (N = 200). Study 2 was a secondary analysis of a statewide assessment of Army National Guard service members' beliefs about mental health and suicide (N =1116). Factor analyses results collectively supported a four-factor Military Suicide Attitudes Questionnaire (MSAQ) structure: discomfort, unacceptability, support, and empathic views. Subscale reliabilities ranged from 0.77 to 0.83 across samples. Unacceptability and support displayed significant negative correlations with psychological distress. Men displayed more negative suicide-related beliefs compared to women counterparts. Discomfort and unacceptability beliefs displayed significant positive associations with perceived barriers to care. The final short version of the MSAQ is an efficient, multi-dimensional measure of military suicide-related beliefs. The instrument can be used for public health assessment and program evaluation in military settings.

Patient Handoff Processes: Implementation and Effects of Bedside Handoffs, the Teach-Back Method, and Discharge Bundles on an Inpatient Oncology Unit.

BACKGROUND: Bedside handoffs, the teach-back method, and discharge bundles have been shown to contribute to empowering patients to actively engage in their treatment. OBJECTIVES: The objectives were to identify patient activation scores, patient readmission rates, and nursing staff satisfaction before and after implementing bedside handoffs, the teach-back method, and discharge bundles on an inpatient oncology unit at a large military treatment facility. METHODS: A series of three cycles using the Plan-Do-Study-Act framework guided implementation of the multifaceted approach. Patient activation scores, readmission rates, staff satisfaction, and anecdotal feedback from patients and nursing staff were collected prior to and following implementation. FINDINGS: The sample of patients with cancer had high patient activation scores. After implementation of the multifaceted approach, readmission rates decreased from 32% to 25%, and staff satisfaction improved.