Design of a brief psychological intervention for youth who self-harm: a formative study in India

Lived experience codesign of self-harm interventions: a scoping review

OBJECTIVES

This study aims to map existing literature describing how people with lived experience of self-harm have engaged in codesigning self-harm interventions, understand barriers and facilitators to this engagement, and how the meaningfulness of codesign has been evaluated.

DESIGN

Scoping review by Joanna Briggs Institute methodology. A protocol was published online (http://dx.doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/P52UD).

DATA SOURCES

PubMed, Embase, PsycINFO, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, PROSPERO, ClinicalTrials.gov and relevant websites were searched on 24 December 2022 (repeated 4 November 2023).

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

We included studies where individuals with lived experience of self-harm (first-hand or caregiver) have codesigned self-harm interventions.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Results were screened at title and abstract level, then full-text level by two researchers independently. Prespecified data were extracted, charted and sorted into themes.

RESULTS

We included 22 codesigned interventions across mobile health, educational settings, prisons and emergency departments. Involvement varied from designing content to multistage involvement in planning, delivery and dissemination. Included papers described the contribution of 159 female, 39 male and 21 transgender or gender diverse codesigners. Few studies included contributors from a minoritised ethnic or LGBTQIA+ group. Six studies evaluated how meaningfully people with lived experience were engaged in codesign: by documenting the impact of contributions on intervention design or through postdesign reflections. Barriers included difficulties recruiting inclusively, making time for meaningful engagement in stretched services and safeguarding concerns for codesigners. Explicit processes for ensuring safety and well-being, flexible schedules, and adequate funding facilitated codesign.

CONCLUSIONS

To realise the potential of codesign to improve self-harm interventions, people with lived experience must be representative of those who use services. This requires processes that reassure potential contributors and referrers that codesigners will be safeguarded, remunerated, and their contributions used and valued.

Review: Patient engagement in child, adolescent, and youth mental health care research - a scoping review

BACKGROUND

Youth and children's lived experiences are rarely considered in studies seeking to improve or evaluate their mental health care. We conducted a scoping review to identify approaches to child, adolescent, and youth engagement in mental health studies as well as study-reported barriers, constraints, and facilitators to engagement.

METHOD

We systematically searched six electronic databases for literature. We included studies of mental health care service design, development, or evaluation that involved engagement of children, adolescents, and/or youth with mental disorders or who intentionally self-harm. Studies could be of any design as long as patient engagement was used at any point during its design and/or conduct. Engagement could include co-designing health services/interventions and/or participating as a co-researcher. We assessed the reporting of patient engagement using the Guidance for Reporting Involvement of Patients and the Public 2 Long-Form (GRIPP2-LF) checklist and used the Experience Based Co-design (EBCD) framework to guide data extraction and analysis.

RESULTS

Sixteen articles were included in the review. Most studies used engagement to develop or adapt a mental health service (75%) and utilized a participatory or co-design approach (69%). Participants were namely adolescents and youth (aged 10-24 years) with some studies including young adults (up to 29 years old). Most studies followed less than 50% of the EBCD framework, and the commonly reported study barriers were related to aspects addressed in EBCD: time restrictions, recruitment, and generalizability. Frequently reported study facilitators included study methodology, youth engagement, and having a diverse participant sample.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings from this review suggest that the EBCD framework is not commonly used to guide patient engagement in studies of mental health care services. Future initiatives should consider following the framework to ensure meaningful evaluation and improvements to youth and children's mental health care services.

Vulnerabilities and life stressors of people presented to emergency departments with deliberate self-harm; consolidating the experiences to develop a continuum of care using a mixed-method framework

Objective

Suicide is a crucial public health concern. However, the interactions between bio psychosocial vulnerabilities and stressors leading to deliberate self-harm behavior remain unexplored, especially in the Indian context. This study examined the experiences leading to self-harm behavior among people who presented to emergency departments with suicidal attempts.

Methods

In this mixed-methods study, we enrolled 44 patients who presented with self-harm behavior at three tertiary health care facilities between October and December 2019. To collect quantitative data, we employed standardized tools: General Health Questionnaire (GHQ-28), General Help-Seeking Questionnaire, Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview, and the Brief Resilience Scale. Further, we conducted semi-structured interviews to qualitatively explore participants' life experiences and other risk factors. Qualitative analyses were performed using thematic analysis and quantitative descriptive and inferential statistics were performed using STATA software.

Results

The mean age of subjects were 29.8 years. The mean suicidality score for the patients was 26 (±8.7). In univariate analysis, depression and anxiety were positively associated with suicidality. While help-seeking behavior and resilience were negatively associated with suicidality. Qualitative results were centered on three major themes; life stressors, family related stressors, and social support-related vulnerabilities. The subjects' lived experiences were introduced in the backdrop of the interplay of vulnerabilities and stressors.

Conclusion

The biopsychosocial vulnerabilities remain dormant until it is activated by life stressors resulting in severe self-harm behaviors. Mental health team-driven assertive engagement, positive coping, and social support interventions would help prevent reattempts in people with self-harm behaviors.