Self-harm among unaccompanied asylum seekers and refugee minors: protocol for a global systematic review of prevalence, methods and characteristics.

INTRODUCTION: Asylum seekers and refugees are at an elevated risk of self-harm, with younger age and traumatic experiences found to further increase such risk. Despite this, evidence regarding self-harm among unaccompanied asylum seekers and refugee minors has not been synthesised. As self-harm among minors is a risk factor for a range of adverse clinical and social outcomes, including suicide, such information may help to inform evidence-based prevention strategies among these vulnerable populations. This systematic review will synthesise findings from the literature regarding the prevalence, methods and characteristics of self-harm, including risk and protective factors, among unaccompanied asylum seekers and refugee minors internationally. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We searched key electronic databases (PsycINFO, Scopus, PubMed and Ovid MEDLINE) and grey literature for relevant studies published in English from database inception to 10 February 2023. Our primary outcome is self-harm among unaccompanied asylum seekers and/or refugee minors. With the exception of single-case studies, clinical trials and case-control studies, we will include all types of study design that examine the prevalence of self-harm in unaccompanied asylum seekers and/or refugee minors. We will exclude dissertations, conference abstracts, letters, book chapters, editorials, study registrations, registered protocols and qualitative studies. Only studies reporting on participants aged <18 years will be eligible for inclusion. The Methodological Standard for Epidemiological Research Scale will be used to assess the quality of included studies. If there are sufficient studies and homogeneity between them, we will conduct meta-analyses to calculate pooled estimates of self-harm rates, as well as comparisons between subgroups of relevance. If the studies do not report sufficient data, or there is substantial heterogeneity, we will provide a narrative synthesis of the findings. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This review is exempt from ethics approval. Our findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications and conference presentations. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42021292709.

Prevalence, methods and characteristics of self-harm among asylum seekers in Australia: protocol for a systematic review.

INTRODUCTION: Asylum seekers are at increased risk of self-harm compared with the general population, and the experience of detention may further exacerbate this risk. Despite this, evidence regarding the prevalence, methods and characteristics of self-harm among asylum seekers in Australia (including those detained in onshore and offshore immigration detention) has not been synthesised. Such information is necessary to inform evidence-based prevention initiatives, and effective clinical and governmental responses to self-harm. This review will synthesise findings from the literature regarding the prevalence, methods and characteristics of self-harm among asylum seekers in both detained and community-based settings in Australia. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We searched key electronic health, psychology and medical databases (PsycINFO, Scopus, PubMed and MEDLINE) for studies published in English between 1 January 1992 and 31 December 2021. Our primary outcome is self-harm among asylum seekers held in onshore and/or offshore immigration detention, community detention and/or in community-based arrangements in Australia. We will include all study designs (except single case studies) that examine the prevalence of self-harm in asylum seekers. Studies published between 1992-the commencement of Australia's policy of mandatory immigration detention-and 2021 will be included. We will not apply any age restrictions. The Methodological Standard for Epidemiological Research scale will be used to assess the quality of included studies. If there are sufficient studies, and homogeneity between them, we will conduct meta-analyses to calculate pooled estimates of self-harm rates and compare relevant subgroups. If studies report insufficient data, or there is substantial heterogeneity, findings will be provided in narrative form. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This review is exempt from ethics approval as it will synthesise findings from published studies with pre-existing ethics approval. Our findings will be disseminated through a peer-reviewed journal article and conference presentations. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42020203444.

Temporal variations in the distribution of self-harm episodes and methods across the Australian asylum seeker population: An observational study.

BACKGROUND: Temporal patterns in the frequency and characteristics of self-harm episodes across the Australian asylum seeker population may have implications for self-harm prevention and public health policy. The aim of this study was to examine how the distribution of self-harm episodes and method(s) of self-harm used across the Australian asylum seeker population vary according to the 24-hour cycle, day, and month, and to establish a basis for further research. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We conducted an observational study of all 949 self-harm incidents reported across the Australian asylum seeker population (representing a monthly average of 28,992 adults) between 1 August 2014 and 31 July 2015, obtained by Freedom of Information (FOI) from the Department of Immigration. Time of self-harm, day, and month of occurrence were investigated across all five Australian asylum seeker populations (i.e., community-based arrangements, community detention, onshore immigration detention, offshore immigration detention [Nauru], and offshore immigration detention [Manus Island]). Significant variations in distributions over the 24-hour cycle were observed by processing arrangements. Compared with the average distribution across all other processing arrangements, self-harm more commonly occurred among community-based asylum seekers (36.3%) between 12:00 AM and 3:59 AM (p < 0.001), in asylum seekers on Manus Island (36.4%) between 4:00 PM and 7:59 PM (p = 0.02), and among asylum seekers in onshore detention (20.4%) between 8:00 PM and 11:59 PM (p < 0.001). Compared with the average distribution across all other methods, self-poisoning (by medication) (25%) was significantly more likely to occur between 12:00 AM and 3:59 AM (p = 0.009), and self-battery (42%) between 8:00 AM and 11:59 AM (p < 0.001). The highest and lowest monthly self-harm episode rates for the whole asylum seeker population were in August (2014) (5 episodes per 1,000 asylum seekers; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1-11) and in both January and February (2015) (2.1 episodes per 1,000 asylum seekers; 95% CI 0.6-7.2), respectively; however, the overlapping CIs indicate no statistically significant differences across the months. When examining monthly trends by processing arrangements, we observed that self-harm was significantly more likely to occur in August (2014) than other months of the year among asylum seekers in onshore detention (19%) (p < 0.001), in January (2015) on Manus Island (18%) (p = 0.002), and in October (2014) on Nauru (15%) (p < 0.001). The main study limitations were that we could not investigate certain characteristics associated with self-harm (e.g., gender, country of origin), as the Department of Immigration did not routinely collect such data. There was also the potential risk of making a type 1 error, given the exploratory nature of the comparisons we undertook; we minimised this by lowering our significance threshold from 0.05 to 0.01. CONCLUSIONS: Self-harm in the Australian asylum seeker population was found to vary according to time of day and month of the year, by processing arrangements. A series of procedure-related and detention-related factors were observed to be associated with the temporal variations in self-harm. These findings should form the basis for further investigation into temporal variations in self-harm among asylum seekers, which may in turn lead to effective self-harm prevention strategies.

An evaluation of the quality of self-harm incident reporting across the Australian asylum seeker population according to World Health Organization (WHO) guidelines.

BACKGROUND: Asylum seekers are at elevated risk of self-harm, and the personal and public health costs of self-harm are high; yet the monitoring and reporting of self-harm has been limited and lacking in transparency. This study aims to evaluate the quality of self-harm incident reporting across the Australian asylum seeker population, including by processing arrangements (i.e. community-based, community detention, onshore detention, Nauru, and Manus Island). METHODS: All self-harm incidents reported across the entire Australian asylum seeker population between 1 August 2014 and 31 July 2015 were obtained via the Freedom of Information Act. We assessed the quality of self-harm incident reporting according to the World Health Organization (WHO)'s self-harm reporting guidelines. RESULTS: A total of 949 self-harm incident reports were assessed. Date, location (processing arrangement), and time of self-harm were routinely reported. Gender was recorded in less than two thirds (62.1%) of all incidents. Method(s) used to self-harm was reported in 81.5% of all incidents, though IDC-10 codes were not reported in any episodes. Psychological or psychiatric assessments were recorded after 4.0% of all incidents, most frequently on Manus Island (10.9%), and in Nauru (10.0%), and least frequently in community-based arrangements (1.7%) and in onshore detention (1.4%), and not at all in community detention. Ambulances were reported as attending 2.8% of all episodes. Hospital attendances were reported following 6.0% of all self-harm incidents, with attendances most commonly reported in incidents occurring in community detention (30.3%), and in community-based arrangements (19.4%). Medevac (air ambulances) were recorded as being utilised in 0.4% of all incidents (2.1% of episodes on Nauru, 1.8% on Manus Island). CONCLUSIONS: The findings of our study indicate that the accessibility and quality of self-harm data is substandard and inconsistent with WHO self-harm reporting guidelines. Such variable reporting makes the identification of self-harm trends, the implementation of prevention strategies - including those at a policy level - and the clinical management of self-harm, extremely challenging. Improved self-harm reporting and monitoring is urgently needed for mitigating and responding to self-harm risk among asylum seekers.

Self-harm among asylum seekers in Australian onshore immigration detention: how incidence rates vary by held detention type.

BACKGROUND: Detained asylum seekers are at increased risk of self-harm, and the type of detention in which they are held may further exacerbate this risk. In Australia, there are four types of closed (or held) immigration detention for people seeking asylum, with varying levels of security and supports: Immigration Detention Centres [IDCs], Immigration Transit Accommodation [ITAs], Immigration Residential Housing [IRH], and Alternative Places of Detention [APODs]. The objective of this study was to examine the variation in the incidence and method(s) of self-harm among asylum seekers in Australian onshore immigration detention, according to the type of detention in which they are held. METHODS: We obtained data on all self-harm incidents reported among asylum seekers in Australian onshore immigration detention according to held detention type, as well as individual facility, between 1 August 2014 and 31 July 2015, by Freedom of Information. We calculated self-harm episode rates per 1000 asylum seekers using the average population figures for held detention type, as well as for each individual facility comprising the main types of held detention. Method(s) used to self-harm was also extracted for the main sub-populations. RESULTS: The study included 560 episodes of self-harm. Individual facility rates of self-harm ranged from 91 per 1000 asylum seekers (95% CI 72-110) in Yongah Hill IDC to 533 per 1000 asylum seekers (95% CI 487-578) in Perth IDC. On average, calculated self-harm episode rates were highest among asylum seekers in: Immigration Transit Accommodation facilities, 452/1000 (95% CI 410-493); Alternative Places of Detention, 265/1000 (95% CI 233-296); and Immigration Detention Centres, 225/1000 (95% CI 195-254). The most frequently reported methods of self-harm across the main types of held detention were: cutting (35.2%), self-battery (34.8%), and attempted hanging (11.1%). CONCLUSIONS: Self-harm rates for asylum seekers in all types of closed immigration detention were many times higher than rates found in the general population. Average rates were not lower in facilities with lower security features.

Self-harm in the Australian asylum seeker population: A national records-based study.

BACKGROUND: Systematic research into self-harm in the Australian asylum seeker population is scarce, largely due to the lack of accessible data. The aim of this study was to examine the incidence and characteristics of self-harm across the Australian asylum seeker population, and to ascertain whether self-harm rates and characteristics vary by processing arrangements (i.e. community-based arrangements, community detention, onshore detention, offshore detention (Nauru), and offshore detention (Manus Island)), and gender. METHODS: Data relating to the incidence of self-harm, method(s) used to self-harm, processing arrangements, and gender were extracted from all self-harm incidents recorded as occurring among the Australian asylum seeker population between 1st August 2014 and 31st July 2015. Self-harm episode rates were calculated using the average estimated adult population figures for the 12-month period for each asylum seeker population. RESULTS: 949 self-harm episodes were included in the analyses. Rates ranged from 5 per 1000 asylum seekers in community-based arrangements to 260 per 1000 asylum seekers in offshore detention in Nauru. Rates were highest among asylum seekers in offshore and onshore detention facilities, and lowest among asylum seekers in community-based arrangements and community detention. The most common methods of self-harm were cutting (37%), self-battery (26%), and attempted hanging (11%), with asylum seekers in held detention using a wider variety of methods than those in community-based arrangements and community detention. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings highlight the exceptionally high rates of self-harm among detained asylum seekers compared to rates observed in the general Australian population, and among asylum seekers in community-based settings. These findings point clearly to the deleterious impact of immigration detention, and warrant urgent attention.

Getting out of (self-) harm's way: A study of factors associated with self-harm among asylum seekers in Australian immigration detention.

The monitoring of self-harm among asylum seekers in Australian immigration detention has not occurred routinely or transparently. Thus whilst concerns regarding rates of self-harm among asylum seekers have been frequently raised, a paucity of systematic information regarding key factors associated with self-harm among asylum seekers exists. The present study was designed therefore to fill a number of gaps in government monitoring by examining the government's own archived self-harm data. Via a descriptive analysis of self-harm incident reports from all operational Australian immigration detention facilities over a 20-month period to May 2011, obtained under Freedom of Information, the present study identified that 959 incidents of self-harm occurred during this period. A gender bias towards men was also found. In addition to this, 10 different methods of self-harm were identified, the four most common being: cutting (47%), attempted hanging (19%), head hitting (12%) and self-poisoning by medication (6%). Seven different precipitating factors for self-harm were also identified, the four most common were: detention conditions (39%), processing arrangements (27%), negative decisions (24%) and family separation (3%). These findings point strongly to the health benefits of considering alternatives to held immigration detention, such as community based processing.