The Acceptability and Feasibility of an ED-based, Peer-delivered, Suicide Safety Planning Intervention
|The safety and scientific validity of this study is the responsibility of the study sponsor and investigators. Listing a study does not mean it has been evaluated by the U.S. Federal Government. Know the risks and potential benefits of clinical studies and talk to your health care provider before participating. Read our disclaimer for details.|
|ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04068142|
Recruitment Status : Recruiting
First Posted : August 28, 2019
Last Update Posted : November 15, 2019
Safety planning is a brief, ED-feasible intervention which has been demonstrated to save lives, and has been universally recommended by every recent expert consensus panel on suicide prevention strategies. In one popular version of the safety plan developed by Stanley et al, the patient is encouraged to write out the following items: identifying personal signs of a crisis; helpful internal coping strategies; social contacts or settings which may distract from a crisis; using family members or friends for help when in crisis; mental health professionals who can be contacted when in crisis; and restricting access to lethal means. In most emergency departments, safety-planning is done by clinical personnel such as psychologists or social workers, but these providers are often too busy to perform safety-planning well or have multiple other patient care responsibilities.
This study aims to find out if ED patients prefer to complete a safety plan with a peer supporter or clinical personnel. People who are visiting the emergency department for thoughts of self-harm will be asked to participate.
|Condition or disease||Intervention/treatment||Phase|
|Suicidal Ideation Suicide, Attempted Mental Health Issue||Other: Peer Supporter Safety Planning||Not Applicable|
|Study Type :||Interventional (Clinical Trial)|
|Estimated Enrollment :||30 participants|
|Intervention Model:||Parallel Assignment|
|Masking:||None (Open Label)|
|Official Title:||The Acceptability and Feasibility of an ED-based, Peer-delivered, Suicide Safety Planning Intervention|
|Actual Study Start Date :||November 6, 2019|
|Estimated Primary Completion Date :||October 2020|
|Estimated Study Completion Date :||October 2020|
No Intervention: Clinical Personnel Safety Planning
Patients will complete a traditional written suicide safety plan with clinical personnel.
Experimental: Peer Supporter Safety Planning
Patients will complete a traditional written suicide safety plan with peer supporters.
Other: Peer Supporter Safety Planning
The rationale for testing a peer-delivered intervention in the ED relies on the following evidence: a) a peer is an individual with lived experience who is now supporting other mental health patients in crisis; b) the experience of a mental health patient in the ED often shapes the perception of the health system, and may influence willingness to seek future care; c) peers may provide more empathetic care than providers without lived experience, which may positively impact patients; d) peer-based programs for patients with serious mental illness that do not involve safety planning are at least as good as non-peer based programs at preventing hospitalizations and promoting engagement in care, with the most promising interventions involving self-management or peer-navigator roles; and e) existing evidence from high-quality studies is scarce, but in moderate-low quality studies has indicated that peers are no less effective than mental health workers
- Acceptability of intervention [ Time Frame: Up to 12 hours ]Evaluate the proportion of SI patients approached in the ED who agree to receive a peer-delivered safety plan.
- Proportion of eligible patients [ Time Frame: Up to 12 hours ]Evaluate the proportion of patients approached who meet all inclusion/exclusion criteria.
- Quality of safety plans [ Time Frame: Up to 12 hours ]Evaluate the quality of the completed safety plans. This will be done by retrospective review after the patient has left the ED. Safety plans will be graded on a 5-point scale ("poor," "mediocre," "satisfactory," "good," or "excellent") by the investigators using materials developed by Brown and Stanley for this purpose. Using a "safety checklist," responses for each of the 6 safety plan steps will be classified according to the personalization of the information in each step. The number of safety plans that must be repeated or redone by the ED mental health clinician will also be tracked.
- Satisfaction with safety planning [ Time Frame: Up to 12 hours ]Evaluate patient satisfaction with safety planning. This will be assessed by having the patient rate their experience with the safety planning process on a 6-point Likert scale (strongly disagree; disagree somewhat; disagree a little; agree a little; agree somewhat; strongly agree). A Likert scale measures how much someone disagrees or agrees with a particular statement.
To learn more about this study, you or your doctor may contact the study research staff using the contact information provided by the sponsor.
Please refer to this study by its ClinicalTrials.gov identifier (NCT number): NCT04068142
|Contact: Michael P Wilson, M.D., Ph.D.||501-686-5515||MPWilson@uams.edu|
|Contact: Manuel G Alvarez Romero, B.A.||501-214-2035||MAlvarezromero@uams.edu|
|United States, Arkansas|
|University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences||Recruiting|
|Little Rock, Arkansas, United States, 72205|
|Contact: Michael P Wilson, M.D., Ph.D. 501-686-5515 MPWilson@uams.edu|
|Principal Investigator:||Michael P Wilson, M.D., Ph.D.||University of Arkansas|