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
. 2020 Oct 1;3(10):e2022531.
doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.22531.

Assessment of Rates of Suicide Risk Screening and Prevalence of Positive Screening Results Among US Veterans After Implementation of the Veterans Affairs Suicide Risk Identification Strategy

Affiliations

Assessment of Rates of Suicide Risk Screening and Prevalence of Positive Screening Results Among US Veterans After Implementation of the Veterans Affairs Suicide Risk Identification Strategy

Nazanin Bahraini et al. JAMA Netw Open. .

Abstract

Importance: In 2018, the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) implemented the Veterans Affairs (VA) Suicide Risk Identification Strategy to improve the identification and management of suicide risk among veterans receiving VHA care.

Objectives: To examine the prevalence of positive suicide screening results among veterans in ambulatory care and emergency departments (EDs) or urgent care clinics (UCCs) and to compare acuity of suicide risk among patients screened in these settings.

Design, setting, and participants: This cross-sectional study used data from the VA's Corporate Data Warehouse (CDW) to assess veterans with at least 1 ambulatory care visit (n = 4 101 685) or ED or UCC visit (n = 1 044 056) at 140 VHA medical centers from October 1, 2018, through September 30, 2019.

Exposures: Standardized suicide risk screening and evaluation tools.

Main outcomes and measures: One-year rate of suicide risk screening and evaluation, prevalence of positive primary and secondary suicide risk screening results, and levels of acute and chronic risk based on the VHA's Comprehensive Suicide Risk Evaluation.

Results: A total of 4 101 685 veterans in ambulatory care settings (mean [SD] age, 62.3 [16.4] years; 3 771 379 [91.9%] male; 2 996 974 [73.1%] White) and 1 044 056 veterans in ED or UCC settings (mean [SD] age, 59.2 [16.2] years; 932 319 [89.3%] male; 688 559 [66.0%] White) received the primary suicide screening. The prevalence of positive suicide screening results was 3.5% for primary screening and 0.4% for secondary screening in ambulatory care and 3.6% for primary screening and 2.1% in secondary screening for ED and UCC settings. Compared with veterans screened in ambulatory care, those screened in the ED or UCC were more likely to endorse suicidal ideation with intent (odds ratio [OR], 4.55; 95% CI, 4.37-4.74; P < .001), specific plan (OR, 3.16; 95% CI, 3.04-3.29; P < .001), and recent suicidal behavior (OR, 1.95; 95% CI, 1.87-2.03; P < .001) during secondary screening. Among the patients who received a Comprehensive Suicide Risk Evaluation, those in ED or UCC settings were more likely than those in ambulatory care settings to be at high acute risk (34.1% vs 8.5%; P < .001).

Conclusions and relevance: In this cross-sectional study, population-based suicide risk screening and evaluation in VHA ambulatory care and ED or UCC settings may help identify risk among patients who may not be receiving mental health treatment. Higher acuity of risk among veterans in ED or UCC settings compared with those in ambulatory care settings highlights the importance of scaling up implementation of brief evidence-based interventions in the ED or UCC to reduce suicidal behavior.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of Interest Disclosures: Drs Bahraini and Matarazzo reported receiving grants from the Veterans Affairs Office of Mental Health and Suicide Prevention during the conduct of the study. No other disclosures were reported.

Comment in

  • Hard Truths About Suicide Prevention.
    Perlis RH, Fihn SD. Perlis RH, et al. JAMA Netw Open. 2020 Oct 1;3(10):e2022713. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.22713. JAMA Netw Open. 2020. PMID: 33084895 No abstract available.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. The Joint Commission Detecting and treating suicide ideation in all settings. Sentinel Event Alert. 2016;(56):1-7. - PubMed
    1. Luoma JB, Martin CE, Pearson JL. Contact with mental health and primary care providers before suicide: a review of the evidence. Am J Psychiatry. 2002;159(6):909-916. doi:10.1176/appi.ajp.159.6.909 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Gairin I, House A, Owens D. Attendance at the accident and emergency department in the year before suicide: retrospective study. Br J Psychiatry. 2003;183:28-33. doi:10.1192/bjp.183.1.28 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Denneson LM, Kovas AE, Britton PC, Kaplan MS, McFarland BH, Dobscha SK. Suicide risk documented during veterans’ last Veterans Affairs health care contacts prior to suicide. Suicide Life Threat Behav. 2016;46(3):363-374. doi:10.1111/sltb.12226 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Roaten K, Johnson C, Genzel R, Khan F, North CS. Development and implementation of a universal suicide risk screening program in a safety-net hospital system. Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf. 2018;44(1):4-11. doi:10.1016/j.jcjq.2017.07.006 - DOI - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms