Article

Now What Should I Do? Primary Care Physicians' Responses to Older Adults Expressing Thoughts of Suicide

Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of Washington, 1959 NE Pacific St, BOX 356560, Seattle, WA 98195-6560, USA.
Journal of General Internal Medicine (Impact Factor: 3.42). 05/2011; 26(9):1005-11. DOI: 10.1007/s11606-011-1726-5
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Many older adults who die by suicide have had recent contact with a primary care physician. As the risk-assessment and referral process for suicide is not readily comparable to procedures for other high-risk behaviors, it is important to identify areas in need of quality improvement (QI).
Identify patterns in physician-patient communication regarding suicide to inform QI interventions.
Qualitative thematic analysis of video-taped clinical encounters in which suicide was discussed.
Adult primary care patients (n = 385) 65 years and older and their primary care physicians.
Mental health was discussed in 22% of encounters (n = 85), with suicide content found in less than 2% (n = 6). Three patterns of conversation were characterized: (1) Arguing that "Life's Not That Bad." In this scenario, the physician strives to convince the patient that suicide is unwarranted, which results in mutual fatigue and discouragement. (2) "Engaging in Chitchat." Here the physician addresses psychosocial matters in a seemingly aimless manner with no clear therapeutic goal. This results in a superficial and misleading connection that buries meaningful risk assessment amidst small talk. (3) "Identify, assess, and…?" This pattern is characterized by acknowledging distress, communicating concern, eliciting information, and making treatment suggestions, but lacks clearly articulated treatment planning or structured follow-up.
The physicians in this sample recognized and implicitly acknowledged suicide risk in their older patients, but all seemed unable to go beyond mere assessment. The absence of clearly articulated treatment plans may reflect a lack of a coherent framework for managing suicide risk, insufficient clinical skills, and availability of mental health specialty support required to address suicide risk effectively. To respond to suicide's numerous challenges to the primary care delivery system, QI strategies will require changes to physician education and may require enhancing practice support.

0 Followers
 · 
170 Views
  • [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
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Objective. To describe and evaluate the feasibility of integrating a suicide prevention program with Primary Health Care services and evaluate if such system can improve screening and identification of depressive disorder, reduce number of suicide attempters, and lower rate of suicide completion. Methodology. This was a quasi-experimental trial in which one community was exposed to the intervention versus the control community with no such exposure. The study sites were two counties in Western Iran. The intervention protocol called for primary care and suicide prevention collaboration at different levels of care. The outcome variables were the number of suicides committed, the number of documented suicide attempts, and the number of identified depressed cases. Results. We identified a higher prevalence of depressive disorders in the intervention site versus the control site (χ (2) = 14.8, P < 0.001). We also found a reduction in the rate of suicide completion in the intervention region compared to the control, but a higher prevalence of suicide attempts in both the intervention and the control sites. Conclusion. Integrating a suicide prevention program with the Primary Health Care network enhanced depression and suicide surveillance capacity and subsequently reduced the number of suicides, especially in rural areas.
    BioMed Research International 01/2015; 2015:193729. DOI:10.1155/2015/193729 · 2.71 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Objective To advance research on depression communication and treatment by comparing assessments of communication about depression from patient report, clinician report, and chart review to assessments from transcripts.DataOne hundred sixty-four primary care visits from seven health care systems (2010–2011).Study DesignPresence or absence of discussion about depressive symptoms, treatment recommendations, and follow-up was measured using patient and clinician postvisit questionnaires, chart review, and coding of audio transcripts. Sensitivity and specificity of indirect measures compared to transcripts were calculated.Principal FindingsPatient report was sensitive for mood (83 percent) and sleep (83 percent) but not suicide (55 percent). Patient report was specific for suicide (86 percent) but not for other symptoms (44–75 percent). Clinician report was sensitive for all symptoms (83–98 percent) and specific for sleep, memory, and suicide (80–87 percent), but not for other symptoms (45–48 percent). Chart review was not sensitive for symptoms (50–73 percent), but it was specific for sleep, memory, and suicide (88–96 percent). All indirect measures had low sensitivity for treatment recommendations (patient report: 24–42 percent, clinician report 38–50 percent, chart review 49–67 percent) but high specificity (89–96 percent). For definite follow-up plans, all three indirect measures were sensitive (82–96 percent) but not specific (40–57 percent).Conclusions Clinician report and chart review generally had the most favorable sensitivity and specificity for measuring discussion of depressive symptoms and treatment recommendations, respectively.
    Health Services Research 05/2014; 49(5). DOI:10.1111/1475-6773.12187 · 2.49 Impact Factor

Full-text (2 Sources)

Download
39 Downloads
Available from
May 21, 2014