TY - JOUR
T1 - Telephone assessment of suicidal risk at prehospital emergency medical services: a direct comparison with face-to-face evaluation at psychiatric emergency service
AU - Norotte, Cyrille
AU - Zeltner, Laure
AU - Gross, Julia
AU - Delord, Marc
AU - Richard, Caroline
AU - Bembaron, Marie-Caroline
AU - Caussanel, Jean-Marie
AU - Herbillon, Annie
AU - Rousseau, Christine
AU - Chiquet, Carole
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2023 International Academy for Suicide Research.
PY - 2023
Y1 - 2023
N2 - Objective: Assessment of suicidal risk is one of the most challenging tasks faced by health professionals, notably in emergency care. We compared telephone suicide risk assessment at prehospital Emergency Medical Services Dispatch Center (EMS-DC), with subsequent face-to-face evaluation at Psychiatric Emergency Service (PES), using French national Risk-Urgency-Danger standards (RUD). Method: Data were collected for all suicidal adult patients (N = 80) who were addressed by EMS-DC to PES between December 2018 and August 2019 and benefited from RUD assessment at both services. Suicidal risk was given a score of 1, 2, 3 or 4, in order of severity. Results: Mean of the differences between the RUD score at EMS-DC and PES was −0.825 (SD = 1.19), and was found to be significant (p < 0.01). The average time between RUD assessments was 420 min (SD = 448) and was negatively correlated with the difference in the RUD score (r = −0.295, p = 0.008). Associated suicide attempt increased the odds of a decrease in the RUD score (OR = 2.989; 95% CI = 1.141–8.069; p < 0.05). Conclusions: Telephone evaluation of suicidal risk using RUD at EMS-DC yielded moderately higher scores than those obtained by a subsequent face-to face evaluation at PES, with this difference partially explained by the time between assessments, and by clinical and contextual factors.
AB - Objective: Assessment of suicidal risk is one of the most challenging tasks faced by health professionals, notably in emergency care. We compared telephone suicide risk assessment at prehospital Emergency Medical Services Dispatch Center (EMS-DC), with subsequent face-to-face evaluation at Psychiatric Emergency Service (PES), using French national Risk-Urgency-Danger standards (RUD). Method: Data were collected for all suicidal adult patients (N = 80) who were addressed by EMS-DC to PES between December 2018 and August 2019 and benefited from RUD assessment at both services. Suicidal risk was given a score of 1, 2, 3 or 4, in order of severity. Results: Mean of the differences between the RUD score at EMS-DC and PES was −0.825 (SD = 1.19), and was found to be significant (p < 0.01). The average time between RUD assessments was 420 min (SD = 448) and was negatively correlated with the difference in the RUD score (r = −0.295, p = 0.008). Associated suicide attempt increased the odds of a decrease in the RUD score (OR = 2.989; 95% CI = 1.141–8.069; p < 0.05). Conclusions: Telephone evaluation of suicidal risk using RUD at EMS-DC yielded moderately higher scores than those obtained by a subsequent face-to face evaluation at PES, with this difference partially explained by the time between assessments, and by clinical and contextual factors.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85173940986&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1080/13811118.2023.2265432
DO - 10.1080/13811118.2023.2265432
M3 - Article
SN - 1381-1118
SP - 1
EP - 15
JO - ARCHIVES OF SUICIDE RESEARCH
JF - ARCHIVES OF SUICIDE RESEARCH
ER -
