Services for assessment, aftercare, and psychological treatment following self-harm

Rachael Lilley, David Owens
{"title":"Services for assessment, aftercare, and psychological treatment following self-harm","authors":"Rachael Lilley,&nbsp;David Owens","doi":"10.1016/j.mppsy.2009.04.003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p><span>Effective intervention following self-harm is vital because of the strong link between self-harm and suicide. Unfortunately, services for people who self-harm have been poor in the UK and elsewhere. In 2004, the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence issued a guideline setting out clear standards for care following self-harm, many of which are included in this article. Whether this guideline has led to much needed improvements in care is not clear; there are few published experiences concerning implementation of the guidance but some studies suggest that care continues to be unsatisfactory. The barriers to implementation of self-harm guidelines are not clear, but the lack of definitive research evidence for effective treatments is a potential candidate. Several </span>systematic reviews<span> have failed to demonstrate a statistically significant reduction in fatal or non-fatal repetition following intervention after self-harm. Recent studies have, however, shown clear benefits for some psychological therapies – in particular for cognitive behavioural therapy with a problem-solving element. Promising results have also been demonstrated for some brief interventions designed to encourage uptake of aftercare following self-harm. This article sets out a little of the evidence for these potentially beneficial interventions, including recent developments in research evidence and implications for future research.</span></p></div>","PeriodicalId":88653,"journal":{"name":"Psychiatry (Abingdon, England)","volume":"8 7","pages":"Pages 246-251"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2009-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.mppsy.2009.04.003","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychiatry (Abingdon, England)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1476179309000676","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Effective intervention following self-harm is vital because of the strong link between self-harm and suicide. Unfortunately, services for people who self-harm have been poor in the UK and elsewhere. In 2004, the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence issued a guideline setting out clear standards for care following self-harm, many of which are included in this article. Whether this guideline has led to much needed improvements in care is not clear; there are few published experiences concerning implementation of the guidance but some studies suggest that care continues to be unsatisfactory. The barriers to implementation of self-harm guidelines are not clear, but the lack of definitive research evidence for effective treatments is a potential candidate. Several systematic reviews have failed to demonstrate a statistically significant reduction in fatal or non-fatal repetition following intervention after self-harm. Recent studies have, however, shown clear benefits for some psychological therapies – in particular for cognitive behavioural therapy with a problem-solving element. Promising results have also been demonstrated for some brief interventions designed to encourage uptake of aftercare following self-harm. This article sets out a little of the evidence for these potentially beneficial interventions, including recent developments in research evidence and implications for future research.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
自残后的评估、善后和心理治疗服务
在自残之后进行有效的干预是至关重要的,因为自残和自杀之间有着紧密的联系。不幸的是,在英国和其他地方,为自残者提供的服务一直很差。2004年,国家健康和临床卓越研究所发布了一项指导方针,为自残后的护理制定了明确的标准,其中许多内容都包含在本文中。目前尚不清楚该指南是否带来了急需的护理改善;很少有关于指南实施的已发表的经验,但一些研究表明,护理仍然不令人满意。实施自我伤害指南的障碍尚不清楚,但缺乏有效治疗的明确研究证据是一个潜在的候选因素。几项系统评价未能证明在自我伤害后进行干预后致命或非致命重复的统计学显著减少。然而,最近的研究表明,某些心理疗法有明显的好处,尤其是带有解决问题元素的认知行为疗法。一些旨在鼓励自残后接受善后护理的简短干预措施也证明了有希望的结果。本文列出了这些潜在有益干预措施的一些证据,包括研究证据的最新进展和对未来研究的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Contents Editorial Board Mental illness, dangerousness and protecting society Personal autonomy and mental capacity The Mental Health Act and the Mental Capacity Act: untangling the relationship
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1