Article

Influences on Call Outcomes among Veteran Callers to the National Veterans Crisis Line

Center for the Study and Prevention of Suicide, Department of Psychiatry, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, NY, USA.
Suicide and Life-Threatening Behavior (Impact Factor: 1.4). 04/2013; 43(5). DOI: 10.1111/sltb.12033
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT The association of caller and call characteristics with proximal outcomes of Veterans Crisis Line calls were examined. From October 1-7, 2010, 665 veterans with recent suicidal ideation or a history of attempted suicide called the Veterans Crisis Line; 646 had complete data and were included in the analyses. A multivariable multinomial logistic regression was conducted to identify correlates of a favorable outcome (a resolution or a referral) when compared to an unfavorable outcome (no resolution or referral). A multivariable logistic regression was used to identify correlates of responder-rated caller risk in a subset of calls. Approximately 84% of calls ended with a favorable outcome, 25% with a resolution, and 59% with a referral to a local health care provider. Calls from high-risk callers had greater odds of ending with a referral than without a resolution or referral, as did weekday calls (6:00 am to 5:59 pm EST, Monday through Friday). Responders used caller intent to die and the absence of future plans to determine caller risk. Findings suggest that the Veterans Crisis Line is a useful mechanism for generating referrals for high-risk veteran callers. Responders appeared to use known risk and protective factors to determine caller risk.

0 Followers
 · 
106 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Research and training on suicide is critical given the fact that the majority of suicide deaths are preventable with accurate identification of risk and intervention by trained individuals. However, implementing and evaluating training is difficult because of the multiple factors involved, including, but not limited to, the heterogeneity of trainees, their diverse roles in suicide prevention, absence of clear guidelines for training content across settings, and limited methods for assessing outcomes. Here, three groups of trainees are discussed: community and professional gatekeepers and behavioral health providers. The roles each group plays in managing suicide risk and the training content it needs to be effective are addressed. A staged training approach is proposed, building on the core components of currently used suicide training: knowledge, attitudes, and skills/behaviors. Limitations of current assessment methods are identified and recommendations for alternative methods are provided. The article concludes with a discussion of next steps in moving the field forward, including overcoming challenges and identifying and engaging opportunities.
    American Journal of Preventive Medicine 09/2014; 47(3):S216–S221. DOI:10.1016/j.amepre.2014.05.033 · 4.28 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Context In 2012, the National Action Alliance for Suicide Prevention’s Research Prioritization Task Force (RPTF) released a series of Aspirational Goals (AGs) to decrease suicide deaths and attempts. The RPTF asked experts to summarize what was known about particular AGs and to propose research pathways that would help reach them. This manuscript describes what is known about the benefits of access to health care (AG8) and continuity of care (AG9) for individuals at risk for suicide. Research pathways are proposed to address limitations in current knowledge, particularly in U.S. healthcare-based research. Evidence acquisition Using a three-step process, the expert panel reviewed available literature from electronic databases. For two AGs, the experts summarized the current state of knowledge, determined breakthroughs needed to advance the field, and developed a series of research pathways to achieve prevention goals. Evidence synthesis Several components of healthcare provision have been found to be associated with reduced suicide ideation, and in some cases they mitigated suicide deaths. Randomized trials are needed to provide more definitive evidence. Breakthroughs that support more comprehensive patient data collection (e.g., real-time surveillance, death record linkage, and patient registries) would facilitate the steps needed to establish research infrastructure so that various interventions could be tested efficiently within various systems of care. Short-term research should examine strategies within the current healthcare systems, and long-term research should investigate models that redesign the health system to prioritize suicide prevention. Conclusions Evidence exists to support optimism regarding future suicide prevention, but knowledge is limited. Future research is needed on U.S. healthcare services and system enhancements to determine which of these approaches can provide empirical evidence for reducing suicide.
    American Journal of Preventive Medicine 09/2014; 47(3):S222–S228. DOI:10.1016/j.amepre.2014.05.038 · 4.28 Impact Factor