Hostname: page-component-857557d7f7-fn92c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-12-06T20:33:57.391Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Healthcare Contacts Prior to Suicide by Those in Contact With Mental Health Services

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 June 2025

Marcos Del Pozo Banos
Affiliation:
1Swansea University, Swansea, United Kingdom
Keith Lloyd
Affiliation:
1Swansea University, Swansea, United Kingdom
Louis Appleby
Affiliation:
2National Confidential Inquiry into Suicide and Safety in Mental Health (NCISH), Centre for Mental Health and Safety, School of Health Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
Nav Kapur
Affiliation:
2National Confidential Inquiry into Suicide and Safety in Mental Health (NCISH), Centre for Mental Health and Safety, School of Health Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
Ann John
Affiliation:
1Swansea University, Swansea, United Kingdom
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Aims: People under mental health (MH) services’ care are at increased risk of suicide. We aimed to identify opportunities for suicide prevention and underpinning data enhancement in people with recent contact with MH services.

Methods: A population-based study of all who died by suicide in the year following an MH services contact in Wales, 2001–2015 (cases), paired with similar patients, with the same mental health diagnoses, who did not die by suicide (controls). We linked the National Confidential Inquiry into Suicide and Safety in Mental Health and the Suicide Information Database – Cymru with primary and secondary healthcare records. We present odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals (OR [95% CI]) of conditional logistic regression.

Results: We matched 1,031 cases with 5,155 controls. In the year before their death, 98.3% of cases were in contact with healthcare services, and 28.5% presented with self-harm.

A high proportion (98.3%) of cases were in contact with primary and secondary healthcare services in the year before their death. Compared with controls, cases were more likely to attend emergency departments (OR 2.4 [2.1–2.7]) and have emergency hospital admissions (OR 1.5 [1.4–1.7]); but less likely to have primary care contacts (OR 0.7 [0.6–0.9]), out-patient attendances (OR 0.2 [0.2–0.3]) and missed/cancelled out-patient appointments (OR 0.9 [0.8–1.0]).

A high proportion of cases presented to primary and secondary healthcare services with accidents, injury and poisoning, and especially self-harm – more so than controls (for self-harm, 28.5% of cases compared with 8.5% of controls; OR 3.6 [2.8–4.5]). This was particularly true for female patients admitted to hospital with injury and poisoning (OR 3.3 [2.5–4.5] in females compared with 2.6 [2.1–3.1] in males).

Conclusion: We may be missing existing opportunities to intervene across all settings, particularly when people present to emergency departments and hospitals, especially with self-harm. Intent underlying injury and poisoning events may be undisclosed, or recorded as undetermined or without specifying intent when they may in fact be self-harm, particularly in females. Efforts should be made to appropriately identify those who are self-harming, including by direct and non-judgmental questioning on presentation underpinned by staff training and awareness. Prevention efforts should focus on strengthening non-urgent and routine contacts (primary care and outpatients), responding to emergency contacts, and better self-harm care. This study also highlights the benefits of enhancing clinical audit systems with routinely collected data for data completeness, breadth, and depth.

Information

Type
Rapid-Fire Presentations
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2025. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of Royal College of Psychiatrists

Footnotes

Abstracts were reviewed by the RCPsych Academic Faculty rather than by the standard BJPsych Open peer review process and should not be quoted as peer-reviewed by BJPsych Open in any subsequent publication.

Submit a response

eLetters

No eLetters have been published for this article.