Hospital-presenting self-harm and ideation: Comparison of incidence, profile and risk of repetition

  • Eve Griffin
  • , Brendan Bonner
  • , Denise O'Hagan
  • , Katerina Kavalidou
  • , Paul Corcoran

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

Objective: The aim of this study was to describe presentations to hospital as a result of self-harm or suicidal ideation and to examine patterns of repetition. Method: Presentations made to hospital emergency departments in Northern Ireland following self-harm and ideation between April 2012 and March 2017 were recorded by the Northern Ireland Registry of Self-harm. Person-based rates per 100,000 were calculated using national population estimates. Risk of repeat attendance to hospital was examined using Kaplan-Meier analyses. Results: A total of 62,213 presentations to emergency departments following self-harm or with ideation were recorded. The rate of self-harm was more than twice the rate of hospital-presenting ideation. Rates of ideation were higher among men, and both self-harm and ideation rates peaked for girls aged 15–19 and men aged 20–24 years. The cumulative probability of repeat attendance to hospital was higher following ideation (52% after 12 months), primarily because 12% of ideation presentations were followed by a subsequent self-harm presentation, whereas 4% of self-harm presentations were followed by ideation. Conclusions: Our findings indicate that hospital presenters with ideation are at high risk of future self-harm. The transition from ideation to suicidal behaviour is important to consider and research could inform effective and early intervention measures.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)76-81
Number of pages6
JournalGeneral Hospital Psychiatry
Volume61
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Nov 2019

Keywords

  • Emergency department
  • Hospital
  • Repetition
  • Self-harm
  • Suicidal ideation

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Hospital-presenting self-harm and ideation: Comparison of incidence, profile and risk of repetition'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this