Intensive supportive ambulatory aftercare may increase adherence to treatment and decrease depressive symptoms in patients after a suicide attempt

Héloïse Delavenne , Frederico Duarte Garcia , Nathalie Giraudeau , Sandrine Louchart , Lynda Zarrou , Humberto Correa , Florence Thibaut
{"title":"Intensive supportive ambulatory aftercare may increase adherence to treatment and decrease depressive symptoms in patients after a suicide attempt","authors":"Héloïse Delavenne ,&nbsp;Frederico Duarte Garcia ,&nbsp;Nathalie Giraudeau ,&nbsp;Sandrine Louchart ,&nbsp;Lynda Zarrou ,&nbsp;Humberto Correa ,&nbsp;Florence Thibaut","doi":"10.1016/j.fjpsy.2020.05.001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objectives</h3><p>Patients who survive a suicide attempt present an increased risk of relapse during the three months after discharge from a hospital, referred to herein as the post-discharge period. Developing and assessing the efficacy and safety of methods that reduce the risk of relapse in the post-discharge period is critical for professionals in the field of suicide prevention. This study aimed to compare the efficacy of a new Intensive Psychosocial Care (IPC) program after discharge for a suicide attempt with a Standard Care Program (SCP) in non-hospitalized patients.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>We conducted a open-label prospective trial to compare the outcome of patients who have attempted suicide for a duration of 6 months according to whether they were included in care program group IPC or SCP after discharge from the emergency department.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Using the Beck Depression Inventory short-form (BDI-SF), the IPC program was significantly associated with both a decrease of the total score of the scale at 6th month, and a trend towards a decline in the time lag between discharge and the improvement of depressive symptoms. When compared to SPC, patients receiving the IPC had also a lower drop-out rate (31% versus 43% in the 6th month) and a higher adherence to treatment until the 3rd month (56% versus 41.7%). Median time to reattempt was 83.7 [95%CI: 45.8–121.7] days for IPC as compared to 75.6 [95%CI: 38.8–112.4] days for SCP, respectively.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Personalized follow-up with close contacts by the same caregivers as those who initially assessed the patient in the emergency room improved adherence to care and reduced depressive symptoms more intensely and faster after a suicide attempt.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":12420,"journal":{"name":"French Journal of Psychiatry","volume":"2 ","pages":"Pages 39-47"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"French Journal of Psychiatry","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2590241520300179","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives

Patients who survive a suicide attempt present an increased risk of relapse during the three months after discharge from a hospital, referred to herein as the post-discharge period. Developing and assessing the efficacy and safety of methods that reduce the risk of relapse in the post-discharge period is critical for professionals in the field of suicide prevention. This study aimed to compare the efficacy of a new Intensive Psychosocial Care (IPC) program after discharge for a suicide attempt with a Standard Care Program (SCP) in non-hospitalized patients.

Methods

We conducted a open-label prospective trial to compare the outcome of patients who have attempted suicide for a duration of 6 months according to whether they were included in care program group IPC or SCP after discharge from the emergency department.

Results

Using the Beck Depression Inventory short-form (BDI-SF), the IPC program was significantly associated with both a decrease of the total score of the scale at 6th month, and a trend towards a decline in the time lag between discharge and the improvement of depressive symptoms. When compared to SPC, patients receiving the IPC had also a lower drop-out rate (31% versus 43% in the 6th month) and a higher adherence to treatment until the 3rd month (56% versus 41.7%). Median time to reattempt was 83.7 [95%CI: 45.8–121.7] days for IPC as compared to 75.6 [95%CI: 38.8–112.4] days for SCP, respectively.

Conclusions

Personalized follow-up with close contacts by the same caregivers as those who initially assessed the patient in the emergency room improved adherence to care and reduced depressive symptoms more intensely and faster after a suicide attempt.

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
强化的支持性门诊后护理可以增加对治疗的依从性,并减少自杀未遂患者的抑郁症状
目的自杀未遂的患者在出院后的三个月内(本文称为出院后)复发的风险增加。制定和评估降低出院后复发风险的方法的有效性和安全性对自杀预防领域的专业人员至关重要。本研究旨在比较新的自杀未遂出院后强化心理社会护理(IPC)计划与标准护理计划(SCP)对非住院患者的疗效。方法我们进行了一项开放标签前瞻性试验,根据从急诊科出院后是否被纳入IPC或SCP护理计划组,比较自杀未遂6个月的患者的结果。结果采用Beck抑郁量表简表(BDI-SF),IPC程序与6个月时量表总分的下降以及出院与抑郁症状改善之间的时滞下降趋势显著相关。与SPC相比,接受IPC的患者的退出率较低(31%对第6个月的43%),直到第3个月的治疗依从性较高(56%对41.7%)。与SCP的75.6[95%CI:38.8-112.4]天相比,IPC的中位再尝试时间分别为83.7[95%CI:45.8-121.7]天。结论由与最初在急诊室评估患者的护理人员相同的护理人员对密切接触者进行个性化随访,提高了对护理的依从性,并在自杀未遂后更快、更强烈地减轻了抑郁症状。
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
Editorial board Intensive supportive ambulatory aftercare may increase adherence to treatment and decrease depressive symptoms in patients after a suicide attempt Evidence for the association of the nicotinic acetylcholine receptor CHRNA5/A3/B4 gene cluster and nicotine dependence in a young population of students Euthanasia: Should psychiatric patients be systematically excluded? Who is doing what in emergency departments to ensure memory recovery after self-poisoning? A survey of university hospital centers in France
×
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