Evidence Hub

Interventions to prevent repeat suicidal behavior in patients admitted to an emergency department for a suicide attempt: a meta-analysis

Inagaki M, Kawashima Y, Kawanishi C, Yonemoto N, Sugimoto T, Furuno T, Ikeshita K, Eto N et al.

Journal of affective disorders, 2015

5,319 participants · 134 citations

Abstract

BACKGROUND: A huge number of patients with self-harm and suicide attempt visit emergency departments (EDs). We systematically reviewed studies and examined the effect of interventions to prevent repeat suicidal behavior in patients admitted to EDs for a suicidal attempt.

METHOD: We searched the databases of MEDLINE, PsychoINFO, CINAHL, and EMBASE through August 2013. Eligible studies were randomized controlled trials assessing the effects on repeat suicidal behavior of interventions initiated in suicidal patients admitted to EDs. Interventions in each trial were classified into groups by consensus. Meta-analyses were performed to determine pooled relative risks (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of repetition of suicide attempt for interventions in each group.

RESULTS: Out of 5390 retrieved articles, 24 trials were included and classified into four groups (11 trials in the Active contact and follow-up, nine in the Psychotherapy, one in the Pharmacotherapy, and three in the Miscellaneous). Active contact and follow-up type interventions were effective in preventing a repeat suicide within 12 months (n=5319; pooled RR=0.83; 95% CI: 0.71 to 0.97). However, the effect at 24 months was not confirmed (n=925; pooled RR=0.98; 95% CI: 0.76-1.22). The effects of the other interventions on preventing a repetition of suicidal behavior remain unclear.

LIMITATION: Caution is needed regarding the heterogeneity of the effects.

CONCLUSION: Interventions of active contact and follow-up…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 5,319 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free