Comparing the Acceptability and Quality of Intervention Modalities for Suicidality in the Emergency Department: Randomized Feasibility Trial
dc.contributor.author | Larkin, Celine | |
dc.contributor.author | Tulu, Bengisu | |
dc.contributor.author | Djamasbi, Soussan | |
dc.contributor.author | Garner, Roscoe | |
dc.contributor.author | Varzgani, Fatima | |
dc.contributor.author | Siddique, Mariam | |
dc.contributor.author | Pietro, John | |
dc.contributor.author | Boudreaux, Edwin D | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2023-12-01T20:06:54Z | |
dc.date.available | 2023-12-01T20:06:54Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2023-10-24 | |
dc.identifier.citation | Larkin C, Tulu B, Djamasbi S, Garner R, Varzgani F, Siddique M, Pietro J, Boudreaux ED. Comparing the Acceptability and Quality of Intervention Modalities for Suicidality in the Emergency Department: Randomized Feasibility Trial. JMIR Ment Health. 2023 Oct 24;10:e49783. doi: 10.2196/49783. PMID: 37874619; PMCID: PMC10630858. | en_US |
dc.identifier.issn | 2368-7959 | |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.2196/49783 | en_US |
dc.identifier.pmid | 37874619 | |
dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14038/52819 | |
dc.description.abstract | Background: Emergency departments (EDs) manage many patients with suicide risk, but effective interventions for suicidality are challenging to implement in this setting. ReachCare is a technology-facilitated version of an evidence-based intervention for suicidal ED patients. Here, we present findings on the acceptability and quality of ReachCare in the ED, as well as a comparison of these measures across 3 potential delivery modalities. Objective: Our aim was to test the feasibility of the ReachCare intervention in its entirety through conducting a pilot study with patients presenting with suicidality to the ED. We tested three different ways of receiving the ED-based components of ReachCare: (1) self-administered on the tablet app using a chatbot interface, (2) administered by an in-person clinician, or (3) administered by a telehealth clinician. Methods: In total, 47 ED patients who screened positive for suicide risk were randomly allocated to receive one of three delivery modalities of ReachCare in the ED: (1) self-administered on the patient-facing tablet app with a chatbot interface, (2) delivered by an in-person clinician, or (3) delivered by a telehealth clinician, with the latter two using a clinician-facing web app. We measured demographic and clinical characteristics, acceptability and appropriateness of the intervention, and quality and completeness of the resulting safety plans. Results: Patients assigned high ratings for the acceptability (median 4.00/5, IQR 4.00-4.50) and appropriateness (median 4.00/5, IQR 4.00-4.25) of ReachCare's ED components, and there were no substantial differences across the 3 delivery modalities [H(acceptability)=3.90, P=.14; H(appropriateness)=1.05, P=.59]. The self-administered modality took significantly less time than the 2 clinician modalities (H=27.91, P<.001), and the usability of the self-administered version was in the "very high" range (median 93.75/100, IQR 80.00-97.50). The safety plans created across all 3 modalities were high-quality (H=0.60, P=.74). Conclusions: Patients rated ReachCare in the ED as highly acceptable and appropriate regardless of modality. Self-administration may be a feasible way to ensure patients with suicide risk receive an intervention in resource constrained EDs. Limitations include small sample size and demographic differences between those enrolled versus not enrolled. Further research will examine the clinical outcomes of patients receiving both the in-ED and post-ED components of ReachCare. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04720911; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04720911. | en_US |
dc.language.iso | en | en_US |
dc.relation.ispartof | JMIR Mental Health | en_US |
dc.relation.url | https://doi.org/10.2196/49783 | en_US |
dc.rights | ©Celine Larkin, Bengisu Tulu, Soussan Djamasbi, Roscoe Garner, Fatima Varzgani, Mariam Siddique, John Pietro, Edwin D Boudreaux. Originally published in JMIR Mental Health (https://mental.jmir.org), 24.10.2023. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work, first published in JMIR Mental Health, is properly cited. The complete bibliographic information, a link to the original publication on https://mental.jmir.org/, as well as this copyright and license information must be included. | en_US |
dc.rights | Attribution 4.0 International | * |
dc.rights.uri | http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ | * |
dc.subject | emergency | en_US |
dc.subject | emergency department | en_US |
dc.subject | intervention | en_US |
dc.subject | mHealth | en_US |
dc.subject | mental health | en_US |
dc.subject | mobile app | en_US |
dc.subject | mobile health | en_US |
dc.subject | mobile phone | en_US |
dc.subject | mobile technology | en_US |
dc.subject | safety | en_US |
dc.subject | safety planning | en_US |
dc.subject | self-harm | en_US |
dc.subject | suicidal | en_US |
dc.subject | suicide | en_US |
dc.title | Comparing the Acceptability and Quality of Intervention Modalities for Suicidality in the Emergency Department: Randomized Feasibility Trial | en_US |
dc.type | Journal Article | en_US |
dc.source.journaltitle | JMIR mental health | |
dc.source.volume | 10 | |
dc.source.beginpage | e49783 | |
dc.source.endpage | ||
dc.source.country | United States | |
dc.source.country | Canada | |
dc.identifier.journal | JMIR mental health | |
refterms.dateFOA | 2023-12-01T20:06:55Z | |
dc.contributor.department | Emergency Medicine | en_US |