The main objective of this project is to be able to offer a new, specific evidence-based short-term treatment method, the Suicidal Crisis Intervention (SCI), to reduce suicidality. In addition, this study aims to investigate the influence of SCI on other important aspects of suicidality (secondary goal) such as hopelessness, defeat, entrapment, and interpersonal needs.
Research has extensively shown that a previous suicide attempt or a history of suicide attempts are important predictors of suicide death. It is therefore important to provide people with appropriate care after a suicide attempt to limit this risk. Although this risk factor (previous attempts) is known, the number of interventions developed for this risk group is limited. Based on these findings, a short-term treatment trajectory was developed for people after a suicide attempt or a suicidal crisis in Flanders, called the Suicidal Crisis Intervention (SCI). This was inspired by the ASSIP treatment trajectory and the safety plan was also given a significant place within the treatment. In addition, the importance of relatives and social support is emphasized by involving relatives in this treatment. Throughout this treatment, further (treatment) goals are drawn up, in order to generate hope for improvement and to facilitate continuity of care. More information about the concrete content of SCI will follow later in this protocol. A pilot study is currently being conducted to assess the feasibility of this treatment, as well as the experience of patients, relatives and care providers. Based on this, the SCI will be further updated for this effectiveness study. There are currently no specific evidence-based short-term treatment methods in Flanders for people after a suicidal crisis or suicide attempt. The primary research question is therefore: 'Is the Suicidal Crisis Intervention (SCI) in Flanders an effective short-term treatment method for people after a suicidal crisis or suicide attempt?'. The main objective of this project is to be able to offer a new, specific short-term treatment method that has been scientifically proven to reduce suicidality. In addition, we want to investigate the influence of SCI on other important aspects of suicidality (secondary goal) such as hopelessness, defeat, entrapment, and interpersonal needs.
Study Type
INTERVENTIONAL
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
NONE
Enrollment
390
This study's experimental condition consisted of the Suicidal Crisis Intervention (SCI), developed by the Flemish Centre of Expertise of Suicide prevention. The SCI aims to provide tools for dealing with future suicidal crises for people after a suicidal crisis or suicide attempt. The intervention attempts to provide insight into the suicidal crisis by giving suicidality meaning within the life history. It aims to increase motivation for specialized care and therefore facilitate continuity of care. In addition, the method also wants to involve the close relative(s) of the suicidal person in the treatment. The SCI offers care providers a clear structure and handles to do this within a short period of time (4 sessions). Within the SCI are a number of crucial elements: the therapeutic relationship, involving loved ones, person-centred care, the Integrated Explanatory Model for Suicidal Behavior (Van Heeringen, 2007), the safety plan (Stanley \& Brown, 2012) and continuity of care.
Psychiatrisch Centrum Sint Amandus (incl. Mobiel Crisis Team)
Beernem, Belgium
RECRUITINGMedisch Centrum St. Jozef
Bilzen, Belgium
RECRUITINGChange in suicidality: Beck Scale for Suicide Ideation (BSI; Beck & Steer, 1991)
The BSI is a 21-item self-report questionnaire. Each item is rated on a scale from 0 to 2, resulting in a total score ranging from 0 to 38.
Time frame: Change in baseline to post-test [42 days after randomization], to follow-up 1 [132 days after randomization] and to follow-up 2 [222days after randomization]
Change in suicidal behaviour
Using two questions participants will be asked whether they have experienced suicidal thoughts (lifetime and since last measure, or last year for baseline) and whether they attempted suicide (lifetime and since last measure, or last year for baseline)
Time frame: Change in baseline to post-test [42 days after randomization], to follow-up 1 [132 days after randomization] and to follow-up 2 [222days after randomization]
Change in hopelessness: The Beck Hopelessness Scale (BHS; Beck et al., 1974)
A 20-item self-report questionnaire to measure hopelessness in adolescents and adults. Each item is rated as 'true' (score = 1) or 'false' (score = 0) for them over the past week, resulting in a total score ranging from 0 to 20, with higher scores indicating higher levels of hopelessness (worse outcome).
Time frame: Change in baseline to post-test [42 days after randomization], to follow-up 1 [132 days after randomization] and to follow-up 2 [222days after randomization]
Change in defeat: Defeat Scale (DS; Gilbert & Allen, 1998; Griffiths et al., 2015) - short version
A 4-item self-report questionnaire to measure defeat on a five-point Likert scale. A total score ranging from 0 to 16 is obtained, with higher scores indicating more perceptions of defeat (worse outcome).
Time frame: Change in baseline to post-test [42 days after randomization], to follow-up 1 [132 days after randomization] and to follow-up 2 [222days after randomization]
This platform is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional.
Mobiel Crisis Team zorggroep Multiversum
Boechout, Belgium
RECRUITINGOpenbaar Psychiatrisch Zorgcentrum Geel
Geel, Belgium
RECRUITINGUZ Gent
Ghent, Belgium
RECRUITINGAZ Groeninge (incl. Mobiel Crisis Team Kortrijk)
Kortrijk, Belgium
RECRUITINGPsychiatrisch Ziekenhuis Heilige Familie Kortrijk
Kortrijk, Belgium
RECRUITINGPsychiatrisch Centrum Ariadne
Lede, Belgium
RECRUITINGOpenbaar Psychiatrisch Zorgcentrum Rekem
Rekem, Belgium
RECRUITINGAlgemeen Ziekenhuis Glorieux
Ronse, Belgium
RECRUITING...and 2 more locations
Change in entrapment: Entrapment Scale (ES; Gilbert & Allen, 1998; Griffiths et al., 2015) - short version
A 4-item self-report questionnaire to measure entrapment on a five-point Likert scale. A total score ranging from 0 to 16 is obtained, with higher scores indicating more perceptions of entrapment (worse outcome).
Time frame: Change in baseline to post-test [42 days after randomization], to follow-up 1 [132 days after randomization] and to follow-up 2 [222days after randomization]
Change in isolation: Interpersonal Needs Questionnaire (INQ; Van Orden et al., 2012; Hill et al., 2015) - short version
This is a 10-item questionnaire where each item is rated on a 7-point Likert scale with 1= Not at all true for me, 4 = somewhat true for me and 7 = very true for me.
Time frame: Change in baseline to post-test [42 days after randomization], to follow-up 1 [132 days after randomization] and to follow-up 2 [222days after randomization]
Change in (prepared to follow) follow-up care [own questionnaire]
To assess whether participants receive follow-up care or are prepared to receive follow-up care, 14 questions were asked. About which psychological \[none, GP, psychologist, psychiatrist, other health care worker, residential care, waiting list\], medical \[no medication, pain killers, tranquilizers/anxiolytics, sleeping pills, antidepressants, antipsychotics, other\] treatment they were currently receiving, they started/stopped/changed since the start of the study and or prepared to receive. This will not result in a total score, but instead will be used as a descriptive questionnaire.
Time frame: Change in baseline to post-test [42 days after randomization], to follow-up 1 [132 days after randomization] and to follow-up 2 [222days after randomization]
Treatment satisfaction [own questionnaire]
To investigate how patients of the intervention group experienced the SCI, some evaluative questions are asked. Participants are asked to indicate how many sessions they received, how they would rate the treatment \[0-10\], what they thought of the number and length of sessions \[too little/short, good, too many/long\], rate to what degree they agreed \[strongly disagree, disagree, neutral, agree, strongly agree, not applicable\] with 8 statements about the treatment, and 2 open questions about the strengths, weaknesses of the treatment.
Time frame: Post-test [42 days after randomization]