Executive Functioning as a Component of Suicide Risk Assessment: Clarifying its Role in Standard Clinical Applications

2012 ◽  
Vol 34 (2) ◽  
pp. 110-120 ◽  
Author(s):  
Beeta Homaifar ◽  
Nazanin Bahraini ◽  
Morton Silverman ◽  
Lisa Brenner

Clinically, because executive dysfunction (e.g., impulsivity, insight, thinking process) is often thought of in the context of those with traumatic brain injuries and other neurologic conditions, its formal assessment has historically been seen as the domain of those who assess and treat patients with neurologic disease. However, mental health counselors (MHCs) could benefit from learning how executive functioning relates to suicide risk assessment and coping strategies. Assessment of executive functions can be incorporated in routine clinical practice without the need for formal neuropsychological measures or other time-consuming procedures. In fact, during standard clinical assessment, mental health professionals often informally assess components of executive functioning such as impulsivity, insight, and thinking processes. This article highlights aspects of executive functioning with which MHCs may already be familiar and demonstrates their clinical utility in enhancing assessment and management of suicide-related thoughts and behaviors.

2011 ◽  
Vol 26 (S2) ◽  
pp. 1628-1628
Author(s):  
K. Manley ◽  
J. Beezhold

IntroductionSuicide risk-assessment forms a significant part of the workload of mental health professionals (MHPs). There is much research regarding efficacy of different methods/scales of suicide risk-assessment, and effects of formal training on risk-assessment. To date, there is little investigation into how approach to risk-assessment varies amongst professionals on an individual level, or how MHPs react when confronted by lack of information.ObjectiveThis study evaluated how MHPs respond to uncertainty when assessing suicide risk.Methods720 MHPs were given 10 clinical scenarios and asked to assess suicide risk in each case. The scenarios were a mixture of high, medium and low risk cases. In addition, there were scenarios where information provided was incomplete or ambiguous. Subjects graded suicide risk-severity from 1–10 (1 = low, 10 = high).ResultsThe simple scenarios produced a predictable consensus of opinion amongst MHPs. The ambiguous scenario produced three distinct response peaks (Fig. 1) at low, medium, and high risk.Fig. 1[Fig 1]ConclusionsAmbiguous suicide risk separates MHPs into three responder groups:1.‘don’t know’2.more cautious, assumes higher risk3.less cautious, assumes lower risk.This has implications for suicide risk training. Further research is required to fully understand why individuals respond in different ways to suicide risk scenarios.


Crisis ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 39 (1) ◽  
pp. 55-64 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jared F. Roush ◽  
Sarah L. Brown ◽  
Danielle R. Jahn ◽  
Sean M. Mitchell ◽  
Nathanael J. Taylor ◽  
...  

Abstract. Background: Approximately 20% of suicide decedents have had contact with a mental health professional within 1 month prior to their death, and the majority of mental health professionals have treated suicidal individuals. Despite limited evidence-based training, mental health professionals make important clinical decisions related to suicide risk assessment and management. Aims: The current study aimed to determine the frequency of suicide risk assessment and management practices and the association between fear of suicide-related outcomes or comfort working with suicidal individuals and adequacy of suicide risk management decisions among mental health professionals. Method: Mental health professionals completed self-report assessments of fear, comfort, and suicide risk assessment and management practices. Results: Approximately one third of mental health professionals did not ask every patient about current or previous suicidal thoughts or behaviors. Further, comfort, but not fear, was positively associated with greater odds of conducting evidence-based suicide risk assessments at first appointments and adequacy of suicide risk management practices with patients reporting suicide ideation and a recent suicide attempt. Limitations: The study utilized a cross-sectional design and self-report questionnaires. Conclusion: Although the majority of mental health professionals report using evidenced-based practices, there appears to be variability in utilization of evidence-based practices.


2021 ◽  
pp. 103985622098403
Author(s):  
Marianne Wyder ◽  
Manaan Kar Ray ◽  
Samara Russell ◽  
Kieran Kinsella ◽  
David Crompton ◽  
...  

Introduction: Risk assessment tools are routinely used to identify patients at high risk. There is increasing evidence that these tools may not be sufficiently accurate to determine the risk of suicide of people, particularly those being treated in community mental health settings. Methods: An outcome analysis for case serials of people who died by suicide between January 2014 and December 2016 and had contact with a public mental health service within 31 days prior to their death. Results: Of the 68 people who had contact, 70.5% had a formal risk assessment. Seventy-five per cent were classified as low risk of suicide. None were identified as being at high risk. While individual risk factors were identified, these did not allow to differentiate between patients classified as low or medium. Discussion: Risk categorisation contributes little to patient safety. Given the dynamic nature of suicide risk, a risk assessment should focus on modifiable risk factors and safety planning rather than risk prediction. Conclusion: The prediction value of suicide risk assessment tools is limited. The risk classifications of high, medium or low could become the basis of denying necessary treatment to many and delivering unnecessary treatment to some and should not be used for care allocation.


2017 ◽  
Vol 41 (S1) ◽  
pp. S41-S41
Author(s):  
V. Carli

Suicidal behaviour is the most common psychiatric emergency. A large proportion of suicidal behaviour can be prevented, particularly in cases associated with mental disorders. Early recognition of suicidality and reliable evaluation of suicide risk are crucial for the clinical prevention of suicide. Evaluation of suicidal risk involves assessment of suicidal intent, previous suicide attempts, underlying psychiatric disorders, the patients’ personality, the social network, and suicide in the family or among acquaintances as well as other well-known risk factors. Suicide risk assessment should take place on several levels and relate to the patient, the family and social network but also to the availability of treatment, rehabilitation and prevention resources in the community. As suicide risk fluctuates within a short period of time, it is important to repeat the suicide risk assessment over time in an emphatic and not mechanistic way. The suicidal person may mislead both family members and hospital staff, giving a false sense of independence and of being able to manage without the help of others. Although extreme ambivalence to living or dying is often strongly expressed by the suicidal individual, it is not seldom missed by others. If observed in the diagnostic and treatment process, dialogue and reflection on such ambivalence can be used to motivate the patient for treatment and to prevent suicide. If ambivalence and suicidal communications go undiscovered, the treatment process and the life of the patient can be endangered. Today, several measurement tools of suicide risk exist, including psychometric and biological measurements. Some of these tools have been extensively studied and measures of their sensitivity and specificity have been estimated. This allows for the formulation of an approximate probability that a suicidal event might happen in the future. However, the low precision of the predictions make these tools insufficient from the clinical perspective and they contribute very little information that is not already gained in a standard clinical interview. Psychiatrists and other mental health professionals have always longed for reliable and precise tools to predict suicidal behavior, which could support their clinical practice, allow them to concentrate resources on patients that really need them, and backup their clinical judgement, in case of eventual legal problems. In order to be useful, however, the approximate probability that a suicidal event might happen in the future is not sufficient to significantly change clinical routines and practices. These should rely on the available evidence base and always consider the safety of the patient as paramount.Disclosure of interestThe author declares that he has no competing interest.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Deinera Exner-Cortens ◽  
Elizabeth Baker ◽  
Shawna Gray ◽  
Marisa Van Bavel ◽  
Rocio Ramirez Rivera ◽  
...  

BACKGROUND Suicide is a leading cause of death among youth and a prominent concern for school mental health providers. Indeed, schools play a key role in suicide prevention, including participating in risk assessments with students expressing suicidal ideation. In the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, many schools now need to offer mental health services, including suicide risk assessment, via eHealth platforms. Post pandemic, the use of eHealth risk assessments will support more accessible services for youth living in rural and remote areas. However, as the remote environment is a new context for many schools, guidance is needed on best practices for eHealth suicide risk assessment among youth. OBJECTIVE This study aims to conduct a rapid, systematic scoping review to explore promising practices for conducting school-based suicide risk assessment among youth via eHealth (ie, information technologies that allow for remote communication). METHODS This review included peer-reviewed articles and gray literature published in English between 2000 and 2020. Although we did not find studies that specifically explored promising practices for school-based suicide risk assessment among youth via eHealth platforms, we found 12 peer-reviewed articles and 23 gray literature documents that contained relevant information addressing our broader study purpose; thus, these 35 sources were included in this review. RESULTS We identified five key recommendation themes for school-based suicide risk assessment among youth via eHealth platforms in the 12 peer-reviewed studies. These included accessibility, consent procedures, session logistics, safety planning, and internet privacy. Specific recommendation themes from the 23 gray literature documents substantially overlapped with and enhanced three of the themes identified in the peer-reviewed literature—consent procedures, session logistics, and safety planning. In addition, based on findings from the gray literature, we expanded the <i>accessibility</i> theme to a broader theme termed <i>youth engagement</i>, which included information on accessibility and building rapport, establishing a therapeutic space, and helping youth prepare for remote sessions. Finally, a new theme was identified in the gray literature findings, specifically concerning school mental health professional boundaries. A second key difference between the gray and peer-reviewed literature was the former’s focus on issues of equity and access and how technology can reinforce existing inequalities. CONCLUSIONS For school mental health providers in need of guidance, we believe that these six recommendation themes (ie, youth engagement, school mental health professional boundaries, consent procedures, session logistics, safety planning, and internet privacy) represent the most promising directions for school-based suicide risk assessment among youth using eHealth tools. However, suicide risk assessment among youth via eHealth platforms in school settings represents a critical research gap. On the basis of the findings of this review, we provide specific recommendations for future research, including the need to focus on the needs of diverse youth. CLINICALTRIAL


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document