Suicidal ideation in male UK military personnel who sustained a physical combat injury in Afghanistan and the mediating role of leaving service: The ADVANCE cohort study.

IF 2.5 4区 医学 Q2 PSYCHIATRY International Journal of Social Psychiatry Pub Date : 2024-11-01 Epub Date: 2024-07-31 DOI:10.1177/00207640241264195
Daniel Dyball, Charlotte Williamson, Alexander N Bennett, Susie Schofield, Christopher J Boos, Anthony Mj Bull, Paul Cullinan, Nicola T Fear
{"title":"Suicidal ideation in male UK military personnel who sustained a physical combat injury in Afghanistan and the mediating role of leaving service: The ADVANCE cohort study.","authors":"Daniel Dyball, Charlotte Williamson, Alexander N Bennett, Susie Schofield, Christopher J Boos, Anthony Mj Bull, Paul Cullinan, Nicola T Fear","doi":"10.1177/00207640241264195","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background/aims: </strong>Suicidal Ideation (SI) is a risk factor for suicide, a leading cause of death amongst young men globally. In this study we assess whether sustaining a serious physical combat injury is associated with SI and whether leaving service mediates this association.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We analysed data from male UK Armed Forces personnel who sustained a combat injury in Afghanistan and a frequency-matched comparison group who did not sustain such an injury (the ADVANCE cohort). SI was measured from the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 item 'thoughts that you would be better off dead or of hurting yourself in some way'.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Approximately, 11.9% (<i>n</i> = 61) of the uninjured group, 15.3% (<i>n</i> = 83) of the overall injured group, 8.5% (<i>n</i> = 13) of an Amputation injury (AI) subgroup and 17.6% (<i>n</i> = 70) of a Non-Amputation Injury (NAI) subgroup reported SI in the past 2 weeks. The NAI subgroup reported greater likelihood of SI (Relative Risk Ratio (RR) = 1.44, 95% confidence interval (CI) [1.04, 2.00]) compared to the comparison group, whereas the overall injured group (RR = 1.23, 95% CI [0.90, 1.68]) and AI subgroup (RR = 0.65, 95% CI [0.36, 1.18]) did not. Leaving service fully mediated the association between sustaining a NAI and SI (natural direct effect RR = 1.08, 95% CI [0.69, 1.69]).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>UK military personnel with NAI reported significantly higher rates of SI compared to demographically similar uninjured personnel, while those who sustained AIs reported no significant difference. Leaving service was associated with greater rates of SI for both injured and uninjured personnel and fully mediated the association between sustaining a NAI and SI.</p>","PeriodicalId":14304,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Social Psychiatry","volume":" ","pages":"1279-1288"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11514323/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Social Psychiatry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00207640241264195","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/7/31 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background/aims: Suicidal Ideation (SI) is a risk factor for suicide, a leading cause of death amongst young men globally. In this study we assess whether sustaining a serious physical combat injury is associated with SI and whether leaving service mediates this association.

Methods: We analysed data from male UK Armed Forces personnel who sustained a combat injury in Afghanistan and a frequency-matched comparison group who did not sustain such an injury (the ADVANCE cohort). SI was measured from the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 item 'thoughts that you would be better off dead or of hurting yourself in some way'.

Results: Approximately, 11.9% (n = 61) of the uninjured group, 15.3% (n = 83) of the overall injured group, 8.5% (n = 13) of an Amputation injury (AI) subgroup and 17.6% (n = 70) of a Non-Amputation Injury (NAI) subgroup reported SI in the past 2 weeks. The NAI subgroup reported greater likelihood of SI (Relative Risk Ratio (RR) = 1.44, 95% confidence interval (CI) [1.04, 2.00]) compared to the comparison group, whereas the overall injured group (RR = 1.23, 95% CI [0.90, 1.68]) and AI subgroup (RR = 0.65, 95% CI [0.36, 1.18]) did not. Leaving service fully mediated the association between sustaining a NAI and SI (natural direct effect RR = 1.08, 95% CI [0.69, 1.69]).

Conclusions: UK military personnel with NAI reported significantly higher rates of SI compared to demographically similar uninjured personnel, while those who sustained AIs reported no significant difference. Leaving service was associated with greater rates of SI for both injured and uninjured personnel and fully mediated the association between sustaining a NAI and SI.

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
在阿富汗遭受身体伤害的英国男性军人的自杀意念以及退役的中介作用:ADVANCE 队列研究。
背景/目的:自杀意念(SI)是自杀的一个风险因素,也是全球年轻男性的主要死因。在这项研究中,我们评估了在战斗中遭受严重身体伤害是否与自杀意念有关,以及退役是否会调节这种关联:我们分析了在阿富汗作战中受伤的英国男性武装部队人员和未受过此类伤害的频率匹配对比组(ADVANCE 队列)的数据。SI是通过患者健康问卷-9中的 "认为自己死了会更好或以某种方式伤害自己的想法 "项目进行测量的:大约有 11.9%(n = 61)的未受伤组、15.3%(n = 83)的总体受伤组、8.5%(n = 13)的截肢损伤(AI)亚组和 17.6%(n = 70)的非截肢损伤(NAI)亚组报告在过去两周内有 SI。与对比组相比,非截肢损伤亚组报告发生 SI 的可能性更大(相对风险比 (RR) = 1.44,95% 置信区间 (CI) [1.04,2.00]),而整个受伤组(RR = 1.23,95% CI [0.90,1.68])和截肢损伤亚组(RR = 0.65,95% CI [0.36,1.18])则没有报告发生 SI 的可能性。退役完全介导了非自愿退伍与自愿退伍之间的关联(自然直接效应 RR = 1.08,95% CI [0.69,1.69]):结论:与人口统计学上相似的未受伤人员相比,患有非正常损伤的英国军人报告的SI率要高得多,而患有人工损伤的军人报告的SI率则没有显著差异。无论是受伤人员还是未受伤人员,退役都与更高的SI发生率有关,并且完全介导了非正常损伤与SI之间的关联。
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
12.30
自引率
1.30%
发文量
120
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Social Psychiatry, established in 1954, is a leading publication dedicated to the field of social psychiatry. It serves as a platform for the exchange of research findings and discussions on the influence of social, environmental, and cultural factors on mental health and well-being. The journal is particularly relevant to psychiatrists and multidisciplinary professionals globally who are interested in understanding the broader context of psychiatric disorders and their impact on individuals and communities. Social psychiatry, as a discipline, focuses on the origins and outcomes of mental health issues within a social framework, recognizing the interplay between societal structures and individual mental health. The journal draws connections with related fields such as social anthropology, cultural psychiatry, and sociology, and is influenced by the latest developments in these areas. The journal also places a special emphasis on fast-track publication for brief communications, ensuring that timely and significant research can be disseminated quickly. Additionally, it strives to reflect its international readership by publishing state-of-the-art reviews from various regions around the world, showcasing the diverse practices and perspectives within the psychiatric disciplines. This approach not only contributes to the scientific understanding of social psychiatry but also supports the global exchange of knowledge and best practices in mental health care.
期刊最新文献
Individualized Occupational Therapy in Severe Mental Illness-A Recovery Model Approach from a Tertiary care Centre in South India. Discontinuity of psychiatric care among patients with bipolar disorder in the Netherlands. Factors predicting employment status among persons with schizophrenia: A cross-sectional study from Chennai, India. Suicidal behaviors among high school graduates with preexisting mental health problems: A machine learning and GIS-based study. Suicide among adolescents in Brazil in times of pandemic: A perspective.
×
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