This is an intervention development study and therefore is not designed or powered to test hypotheses. Following initial development and refinement of intervention and protocol, an open trial will be conducted at one juvenile detention facility (n=20). Following further refinement, six juvenile detention sites will be randomized to first or second wave of intervention implementation. All youth at an implementation site in suicidal crises will receive the intervention. Data will only be collected from youth with prior assent/consent. Youth will be assessed at the time of the suicidal/self-harm crisis, and at 2 and 4 weeks after initial intervention, and at a two-month follow-up assessment. We will preliminarily examine feasibility of the intervention and associated patterns of suicidal thoughts and behavior and non-suicidal self-injury, linkage to care following release, and presumed mechanisms of change such as hopelessness, self-efficacy to remain safe, urgency to act on suicidal thoughts, and acceptance.
The primary objective of this phase of the study is to develop and refine procedures for the new multi-faceted intervention for trauma-informed suicide prevention (brief cognitive-behavioral and trauma-informed strategies and safety planning for youth who are suicidal and/or self-harming, as well as training of staff in trauma-informed crisis management and de-escalation strategies) for youth in juvenile detention settings. An associated objective is to develop procedures for training staff working with youth in short-term juvenile detention settings to conduct the new intervention for reducing suicidal thoughts and behavior. A third objective is to examine the feasibility of this trauma-informed suicide prevention intervention in terms of initial participant recruitment, fidelity to the treatment model, treatment acceptability, and monitoring of adverse events in an open trial (n=20). This intervention will be iteratively refined during this open trial based on feedback from youth and staff, and experiences using the intervention in juvenile detention. We will also gather information regarding the presumed mechanisms of action and targeted outcomes for this intervention (although the small open trial will not be able to statistically examine effects). As an intervention development study, this study is not powered to test hypotheses. Rather, the purpose of this study is to demonstrate feasibility and acceptability of the intervention and procedures, and to demonstrate viability of the proof of concept. The study is a collaboration between Duke and Wake Forest investigators, and Juvenile Justice in the NC Department of Public Safety.
Study Type
INTERVENTIONAL
Allocation
NA
Purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
NONE
Enrollment
8
The trauma-informed brief suicide intervention based on the SAFETY-A (single crisis session in addition to follow-up caring contacts). Delivered in addition to usual care in facilities.
Duke University
Durham, North Carolina, United States
Wake Forest School of Medicine
Winston-Salem, North Carolina, United States
Number of Participants Who Reported Suicide Attempts as Measured by the Columbia Suicide Severity Rating Scale (C-SSRS)
Determined by a response of "yes" to question #6 on the C-SSRS: "Have you done anything, started to do anything, or prepared to do anything to end your life?"
Time frame: Up to 2 month follow-up assessment
Number of Participants Who Reported Non-Suicidal Self Injury
Assessed with Questions from the Self-Injurious Thoughts and Behavior Interview.
Time frame: Up to 2 month follow-up assessment
Number of Participants Who Were Linked to Mental Health Services After Release
Assessed by CASA (Child and Adolescent Services Assessment) Parent Interview.
Time frame: Up to 2 month follow-up assessment
Number of Participants Reporting Urgency to Act on Suicidal Thoughts
Time frame: Up to 2-month follow-up assessment
Number of Participants Reporting Hope and Reasons for Living After Leaving the Facility
Adapted from items used by Cyzz et al. (2020) and Zullo et al. (2021). Number of participants who report they strongly agree that they have hope for the future and reasons for living after leaving the facility.
Time frame: Up to 2-month follow-up assessment
Number of Participants Who Report Acceptance of Their Current Situation
Time frame: Up to 2-month follow-up assessment
Number of Participants Reporting Self-Efficacy in Keeping Safe
Adapted from items used by Czyz (2016, 2019). The number of participants reporting that they very much agreed that they felt confident in keeping themselves safe is reported.
Time frame: Up to 2-month follow-up assessment
Number of Individuals With Emergency Mental Health Services (ED Visits and Hospitalizations)
Assessed by CASA (Child and Adolescent Services Assessment) Parent Interview.
Time frame: Up to 2-month follow-up assessment
This platform is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional.