Pre-implementation adaptation of suicide safety planning intervention using peer support in rural areas

IF 1.6 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Frontiers in health services Pub Date : 2023-12-22 DOI:10.3389/frhs.2023.1225171
Eva N. Woodward, Amanda Lunsford, Rae Brown, Douglas Downing, Irenia A Ball, Jennifer M. Gan-Kemp, Anthony Smith, Olympia Atkinson, Thomas Graham
{"title":"Pre-implementation adaptation of suicide safety planning intervention using peer support in rural areas","authors":"Eva N. Woodward, Amanda Lunsford, Rae Brown, Douglas Downing, Irenia A Ball, Jennifer M. Gan-Kemp, Anthony Smith, Olympia Atkinson, Thomas Graham","doi":"10.3389/frhs.2023.1225171","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Currently, seventeen veterans die by suicide daily in the United States (U.S.). There are disparities in suicide behavior and access to preventative treatment. One disparity is the suicide rate in rural areas, including the state of Arkansas—suicide deaths among rural veterans increased 48% in the last 2 decades, double that of urban veterans. One major challenge for veterans in rural areas is the lack of healthcare providers to provide Safety Planning Intervention, which is an effective intervention to reduce suicide attempts in the general adult population and among veterans. One solution is more broadly implementing Safety Planning Intervention, by using peers to deliver the intervention in rural communities. Before implementation, the intervention needs to be adapted for peer-to-peer delivery, and barriers and facilitators identified.Since January 2021, using community-based participatory research, we collaboratively developed and executed a 1 year study to adapt Safety Planning Intervention for peer-to-peer delivery in rural communities and identified implementation barriers and facilitators prior to spread. From July 2022 to February 2023, we conducted group interviews with 12 participants: rural veterans with prior suicidal thoughts or attempts in one U.S. state, their support persons, and healthcare professionals with expertise in veteran suicide prevention, Safety Planning Intervention, and/or peer delivery. We collected qualitative data through interviews during nine, 2 h meetings, and quantitative data from one anonymous survey and real-time anonymous voting—all on the topic of core and adaptable components of Safety Planning Intervention and implementation barriers and facilitators for peer delivery in rural communities. Questions about adaptation were designed according to processes in the ENGAGED for CHANGE community-engaged intervention framework and questions about facilitators and barriers were designed according to the Health Equity Implementation Framework. Participants categorized which Safety Planning Intervention components were core or adaptable, and how freely they could be adapted, using the metaphor of a traffic light in red (do not change), yellow (change with caution), and green (change freely) categories.Participants made few actual adaptations (categorized according to the FRAME modification system), but strongly recommended robust training for peers. Participants identified 27 implementation facilitators and 47 barriers, organized using the Health Equity Implementation Framework. Two example facilitators were (1) peer-to-peer safety planning intervention was highly acceptable to rural veterans; and (2) some state counties already had veteran crisis programs that could embed this intervention for spread. Two example barriers were (1) some community organizations that might spread the intervention have been motivated initially, wanting to help right away, yet not able to sustain interventions; and (2) uncertainty about how to reach veterans at moderate suicide risk, as many crisis programs identified them when suicide risk was higher.Our results provide one of the more comprehensive pre-implementation assessments to date for Safety Planning Intervention in any setting, especially for peer delivery (also referred to as task shifting) outside healthcare or clinical settings. One important next step will be mapping these barriers and facilitators to implementation strategies for peer-to-peer delivery. One finding surprised our research team—despite worse societal context in rural communities leading to disproportionate suicide deaths—participants identified several positive facilitators specifically about rural communities that can be leveraged during implementation.","PeriodicalId":73088,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in health services","volume":"22 17","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in health services","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/frhs.2023.1225171","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Currently, seventeen veterans die by suicide daily in the United States (U.S.). There are disparities in suicide behavior and access to preventative treatment. One disparity is the suicide rate in rural areas, including the state of Arkansas—suicide deaths among rural veterans increased 48% in the last 2 decades, double that of urban veterans. One major challenge for veterans in rural areas is the lack of healthcare providers to provide Safety Planning Intervention, which is an effective intervention to reduce suicide attempts in the general adult population and among veterans. One solution is more broadly implementing Safety Planning Intervention, by using peers to deliver the intervention in rural communities. Before implementation, the intervention needs to be adapted for peer-to-peer delivery, and barriers and facilitators identified.Since January 2021, using community-based participatory research, we collaboratively developed and executed a 1 year study to adapt Safety Planning Intervention for peer-to-peer delivery in rural communities and identified implementation barriers and facilitators prior to spread. From July 2022 to February 2023, we conducted group interviews with 12 participants: rural veterans with prior suicidal thoughts or attempts in one U.S. state, their support persons, and healthcare professionals with expertise in veteran suicide prevention, Safety Planning Intervention, and/or peer delivery. We collected qualitative data through interviews during nine, 2 h meetings, and quantitative data from one anonymous survey and real-time anonymous voting—all on the topic of core and adaptable components of Safety Planning Intervention and implementation barriers and facilitators for peer delivery in rural communities. Questions about adaptation were designed according to processes in the ENGAGED for CHANGE community-engaged intervention framework and questions about facilitators and barriers were designed according to the Health Equity Implementation Framework. Participants categorized which Safety Planning Intervention components were core or adaptable, and how freely they could be adapted, using the metaphor of a traffic light in red (do not change), yellow (change with caution), and green (change freely) categories.Participants made few actual adaptations (categorized according to the FRAME modification system), but strongly recommended robust training for peers. Participants identified 27 implementation facilitators and 47 barriers, organized using the Health Equity Implementation Framework. Two example facilitators were (1) peer-to-peer safety planning intervention was highly acceptable to rural veterans; and (2) some state counties already had veteran crisis programs that could embed this intervention for spread. Two example barriers were (1) some community organizations that might spread the intervention have been motivated initially, wanting to help right away, yet not able to sustain interventions; and (2) uncertainty about how to reach veterans at moderate suicide risk, as many crisis programs identified them when suicide risk was higher.Our results provide one of the more comprehensive pre-implementation assessments to date for Safety Planning Intervention in any setting, especially for peer delivery (also referred to as task shifting) outside healthcare or clinical settings. One important next step will be mapping these barriers and facilitators to implementation strategies for peer-to-peer delivery. One finding surprised our research team—despite worse societal context in rural communities leading to disproportionate suicide deaths—participants identified several positive facilitators specifically about rural communities that can be leveraged during implementation.
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
在农村地区利用同伴支持对自杀安全规划干预措施进行实施前调整
目前,美国每天有 17 名退伍军人死于自杀。在自杀行为和获得预防性治疗方面存在差异。其中一个差距是包括阿肯色州在内的农村地区的自杀率--在过去 20 年中,农村退伍军人的自杀死亡率增加了 48%,是城市退伍军人的两倍。农村地区退伍军人面临的一个主要挑战是缺乏提供安全规划干预的医疗服务提供者,而安全规划干预是一种有效的干预措施,可以减少普通成年人和退伍军人的自杀企图。解决方法之一是更广泛地实施安全规划干预,利用同伴在农村社区提供干预。自 2021 年 1 月起,我们利用基于社区的参与式研究,合作开发并实施了一项为期 1 年的研究,以调整安全规划干预措施,使其适用于在农村社区开展同伴互助活动,并在推广前确定实施障碍和促进因素。从 2022 年 7 月到 2023 年 2 月,我们对 12 名参与者进行了小组访谈:美国某州曾有自杀想法或企图的农村退伍军人、他们的支持者,以及在退伍军人自杀预防、安全规划干预和/或同伴传递方面拥有专业知识的医疗保健专业人员。我们通过 9 次 2 小时会议期间的访谈收集了定性数据,并通过一份匿名调查和实时匿名投票收集了定量数据,所有数据都是关于安全规划干预的核心和可调整部分,以及在农村社区实施同伴服务的障碍和促进因素。有关适应性的问题是根据 "参与改变 "社区参与干预框架中的流程设计的,有关促进因素和障碍的问题是根据 "健康公平实施框架 "设计的。参与者将安全规划干预措施的哪些部分归为核心部分或可调整部分,以及可调整的自由度,用红灯(不要改变)、黄灯(谨慎改变)和绿灯(自由改变)的比喻进行分类。根据健康公平实施框架,与会者确定了 27 个实施促进因素和 47 个障碍。两个促进因素的例子是:(1)农村退伍军人对同伴安全规划干预的接受度很高;(2)一些州县已经有了退伍军人危机计划,可以嵌入这一干预措施进行推广。两个障碍是:(1)一些可能推广该干预措施的社区组织起初很积极,希望立即提供帮助,但却无法持续进行干预;以及(2)不确定如何接触到自杀风险适中的退伍军人,因为许多危机项目都是在自杀风险较高时识别他们的。下一步的重要工作之一就是将这些障碍和促进因素与同伴互助的实施策略相结合。有一个发现让我们的研究团队感到惊讶--尽管农村社区的社会环境恶劣,导致自杀死亡人数过多,但参与者们特别指出了几个有关农村社区的积极促进因素,可以在实施过程中加以利用。
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
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Implementation of a mobile prosthetic and orthotic care program in the VA; a qualitative study of implementation challenges and associated strategies for improvement. Creating demand for unmet needs: Agile Storytelling. Editorial: Digital health applications: acceptance, benefit assessment, and costs from the perspective of patients and medical professionals. Reported roles of care partners in a specialized weaning centre-perspectives of patients, care partners, and health care providers. Longitudinal analysis of culture of patient safety survey results in surgical departments.
×
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