Key Points Question Is self-referred brief admission more effective than treatment as usual in reducing the use of inpatient services for individuals who self-harm and are at risk of suicide? Findings In this randomized clinical trial of 125 adults in Sweden, the brief admission group did not show reduced inpatient service use compared with the control group. Both groups showed significant decreases in days admitted to the hospital and in emergency department visits, but only the brief admission group showed a significant decrease in duration of compulsory admission. Meaning Brief admission does not seem to be more effective than treatment as usual in reducing the use of inpatient services.

No abstract

BackgroundBrief Admission is a crisis and risk management strategy in which self-harming and suicidal individuals with three or more diagnostic criteria of borderline personality disorder self-admit to hospital at times of increasing risk when other efforts to stay safe are failing. Standardized in the current randomized controlled trial, the intensity of Brief Admission Skåne is implemented in durations of three days, with a maximum frequency of three times a month. Brief Admission is integrated into existing treatment plans in advance of crises to prevent reliance on general psychiatric admissions for risk management, as these may be lengthy, unstructured, and of uncertain therapeutic value.Methods/designThe overall objective of the Brief Admission Skåne randomized controlled trial is to determine if Brief Admission can replace general psychiatric admission for self-harming and suicidal individuals with complex mental illness at times of escalating risk. Other objectives of the study are to evaluate whether Brief Admission increases daily functioning and enhances coping, reduces psychiatric symptoms including frequency and severity of self-harm and suicidal behaviours. A final objective is to determine if Brief Admission is an effective crisis management model for this population. Participants are randomized at an individual level to either Brief Admission Skåne plus Treatment as Usual or Treatment As Usual. Based on a priori power analyses, N = 124 participants will be recruited to the study. Data collection is in progress, and will continue until June 2018. All participant data are single-blinded and will be handled with intention-to-treat analysis.DiscussionBased on the combined clinical experience of our international research group, the Brief Admission Skåne randomized controlled trial upon which the current protocol is based represents the first initiative to standardize, implement and evaluate Brief Admission amongst self-harming and suicidal individuals, including those with borderline traits. Objectively measuring protocol fidelity and developing English-language Brief Admission study protocols and training materials are implementation and dissemination targets developed in order to facilitate adherent international export of Brief Admission Skåne.Trial registration NCT02985047. Registered November 25, 2016. Retrospectively registered.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12888-017-1371-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Background Family Connections (FC) is a multi-family skills training program for relatives of individuals with borderline personality disorder (BPD) and related difficulties, typically offered once per week for 12–14 weeks. Families with loved ones receiving residential Dialectical Behaviour Therapy DBT (DBT-R) in a different community, or those with multiple caregiving demands may have difficulty participating in weekly standard FC (FC-S). The aims of this paper are to: 1) Evaluate the results of the FC-S approach compared with an intensified weekend FC model developed for family members whose relatives are in DBT-R (FC-R); 2) Evaluate outcomes of FC-R for families with loved ones returning home from DBT-R, as little is known about how this population fares. Methods Data were collected at pre-treatment (T1), post-treatment (T2), and at six-to-seven-month follow-up (T3) in this non-randomized comparison study. A total of 82 family members participated, 34 of whom completed the FC-S program and 48 of whom completed the FC-R program. The evaluation was based upon outcomes derived from a standard battery used in FC research, analyzed by time and treatment setting. A composite score to evaluate family distress was generated. Two-way mixed multivariate analyses of variance (MANOVA) were employed to evaluate time (pre-versus-post versus follow-up) and group (FC-S versus FC-R). Results Scores on measures of mental health difficulties (General Severity Index), sense of burden (Burden Assessment Scale), and Global Family Functioning showed improvement over time. Having a loved one return home from DBT-R was associated with worsening on the GSI and the BAS at post-test. Notably, this deterioration was not found at follow-up. Conclusions Little is known about families with loved ones receiving DBT-R other than the fact that their loved ones had not responded to previous services, which suggests greater complexity and chronicity. Because the family members receiving the weekend intensive FC-R version of FC demonstrated improvement, preliminary support exists for service providers to use the weekend intensive FC-R model as a time-and-cost efficient option whenever barriers exist to participating in weekly FC-S. Our findings also suggest that booster sessions may be indicated for families receiving loved ones home from DBT-R programs.

No abstract

NCT02985047.

Self-harm, comprising non-suicidal self-injury, and suicide attempts, is a serious and potentially life-threatening behavior that has been associated with poor life quality and an increased risk of suicide. In forensic populations, increased rates of self-harm have been reported, and suicide is one of the leading causes of death. Aside from associations between self-harm and mental disorders, knowledge on self-harm in forensic psychiatric populations is limited. The purpose of this study was to characterize the clinical needs of a cohort of forensic psychiatric patients, including self-harm and possible risk factors thereof. Participants (N = 98) were consecutively recruited from a cohort of forensic psychiatric patients in Sweden from 2016 to 2020. Data were collected through file information, self-reports, and complemented with semi-structured interviews. Results showed that self-harm was common among the participants, more than half (68.4%) of whom had at some point engaged in self-harm. The most common methods of non-suicidal self-injury were banging one's head or fist against a wall or other solid surface and cutting, and the most common method of suicide attempt was hanging. The most prominent functions of non-suicidal self-injury among the participants were intrapersonal functions such as affect regulation, self-punishment, and marking distress. Self-harm in general was associated to neurodevelopmental disorders (p = 0.014, CI = 1.23–8.02, OR = 3.14) and disruptive impulse-control and conduct disorders (p = 0.012, CI = 1.19–74.6, OR = 9.41), with reservation to very wide confidence intervals. Conclusions drawn from this study are that self-harm was highly prevalent in this sample and seems to have similar function in this group of individuals as in other studied clinical and non-clinical groups.

Deliberate self-harm behavior (DSH) can have profound effects on a person’s quality of life, and challenges the health care system. Even though DSH has been associated with aggressive interpersonal behaviors, the knowledge on DSH in persons exhibiting such behaviors is scarce. This study aims to (1) specify the prevalence and character of DSH, (2) identify clinical, neurocognitive, psychosocial, and criminological characteristics associated with DSH, and (3) determine predictors of DSH among young violent offenders. Data were collected from a nationally representative cohort of 270 male violent offenders, 18–25 years old, imprisoned in Sweden. Participants were interviewed and investigated neuropsychologically, and their files were reviewed for psychosocial background, criminal history, mental disorders, lifetime aggressive antisocial behaviors, and DSH. A total of 62 offenders (23%) had engaged in DSH at some point during their lifetime, many on repeated occasions, yet without suicidal intent. DSH was significantly associated with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, mood disorders, anxiety disorders, various substance use disorders, being bullied at school, and repeated exposure to violence at home during childhood. Mood disorders, anxiety disorders, and being bullied at school remained significant predictors of DSH in a total regression model. Violent offenders direct aggressive behaviors not only toward other people, but also toward themselves. Thus, DSH must be assessed and prevented in correctional institutions as early as possible, and more knowledge is needed of the function of DSH among offenders.