Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2014 Nov 11:2:e667.
doi: 10.7717/peerj.667. eCollection 2014.

Recent self-harm and psychological measures in the emergency department

Affiliations

Recent self-harm and psychological measures in the emergency department

Jason R Randall et al. PeerJ. .

Abstract

The assessment of self-harm risk is a common, difficult, and perplexing task for many physicians, especially those working in emergency departments (ED). Attempts have been made to determine objective methods for assessing patients with suicidal ideation or self-harm though there is still a lack of knowledge about objective assessments of these patients. A study was conducted where 181 suicidal patients were enrolled in two EDs within the city of Edmonton, Canada. Initial interviews were conducted in the ED which collected basic demographics and medical history as well as psychometric measures including the Beck Hopelessness Scale, Barratt Impulsiveness Scale, Brief Symptom Inventory, Drug Abuse Screening Test 10, and CAGE questionnaire. The results of these measures were compared between those who presented to the ED with self-harm and those who presented only with ideation. Those with recent self-harm scored lower on many of the scales and subscales of distress and impulsivity measured compared to those with no recent self-harm. Possible explanations for this difference include differences in psychological traits between the two groups and possible cathartic effects of self-harm. The lower scores obtained by those that present with self-harm may complicate attempts to use psychometric tools to determine future self-harm risk.

Keywords: Emergency medicine; Psychiatry; Risk assessment; Self-injurious behaviors.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1. Distress level of patients.
Self-harm group versus ideation only group.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Beck AT, Weissman A, Lester D, Trexler L. The measurement of pessimism: the hopelessness scale. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology. 1974;42:861–865. doi: 10.1037/h0037562. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Bolton JM, Spiwak R, Sareen J. Predicting suicide attempts with the SAD PERSONS scale: a longitudinal analysis. The Journal of Clinical Psychiatry. 2012;73:e667. doi: 10.4088/JCP.11m07362. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Bronisch T. Does an attempted suicide actually have a cathartic effect? Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica. 1992;86:228–232. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0447.1992.tb03257.x. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Bullard M. Problems of suicide risk management in the emergency department without fixed, fulltime emergency physician. Chang Gung Medical Journal. 1993;16:30–38. - PubMed
    1. Cooper J, Kapur N, Dunning J, Guthrie E, Appleby L, Mackway-Jones K. A clinical tool for assessing risk after self-harm. Annals of Emergency Medicine. 2006;48:459–466. doi: 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2006.07.944. - DOI - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources