Dataset Information

Predicting self-harm in prisoners: Risk factors and a prognostic model in a cohort of 542 prison entrants.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Self-harm is common in prisoners. There is an association between self-harm in prisoners and subsequent suicide, both within prison and on release. The aim of this study is to develop and evaluate a prediction model to identify male prisoners at high risk of self-harm.

Methods

We developed an 11-item screening model, based on risk factors identified from the literature. This screen was administered to 542 prisoners within 7 days of arrival in two male prisons in England. Participants were followed up for 6 months to identify those who subsequently self-harmed in prison. Analysis was conducted using Cox proportional hazard regression. Discrimination and calibration were determined for the model. The model was subsequently optimized using multivariable analysis, weighting variables, and dropping poorly performing items.

Results

Seventeen (3.1%) of the participants self-harmed during follow up (median 53 days). The strongest risk factors were previous self-harm in prison (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] = 9.3 [95% CI: 3.3-16.6]) and current suicidal ideation (aHR = 7.6 [2.1-27.4]). As a continuous score, a one-point increase in the suicide screen was significantly associated with self-harm (HR = 1.4, 1.1-1.7). At the prespecified cut off score of 5, the screening model was associated with an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.66 (0.53-0.79), with poor calibration. The optimized model saw two items dropped from the original screening tool, weighting of risk factors based on a multivariable model, and an AUC of 0.84 (0.76-0.92).

Conclusions

Further work is necessary to clarify the association between risk factors and self-harm in prison. Despite good face validity, current screening tools for self-harm need validation in new prison samples.

SUBMITTER: Ryland H

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7242092 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Self-harm is a leading cause of morbidity in prisoners. Although a wide range of risk factors for self-harm in prisoners has been identified, the strength and consistency of effect sizes is uncertain. We aimed to synthesise evidence and assess the risk factors associated with self-harm inside prison. METHODS:In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched four electronic databases (PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and PsycINFO) for observational studies on risk factors for self-harm in prisoners published from database inception to Oct 31, 2019, supplemented through correspondence with authors of studies. We included primary studies involving adults sampled from general prison populations who self-harmed in prison and a comparison group without self-harm in prison. We excluded studies with qualitative or ecological designs, those that reported on lifetime measures of self-harm or on selected samples of prisoners, and those with a comparison group that was not appropriate or not based on general prison populations. Data were extracted from the articles and requested from study authors. Our primary outcome was the risk of self-harm for risk factors in prisoners. We pooled effect sizes as odds ratios (OR) using random effects models for each risk factor examined in at least three distinct samples. We assessed study quality on the basis of the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and examined between-study heterogeneity. The study protocol was registered with PROSPERO, CRD42018087915. FINDINGS:We identified 35 independent studies from 20 countries comprising a total of 663?735 prisoners, of whom 24?978 (3·8%) had self-harmed in prison. Across the 40 risk factors examined, the strongest associations with self-harm in prison were found for suicide-related antecedents, including current or recent suicidal ideation (OR 13·8, 95% CI 8·6-22·1; I2=49%), lifetime history of suicidal ideation (8·9, 6·1-13·0; I2=56%), and previous self-harm (6·6, 5·3-8·3; I2=55%). Any current psychiatric diagnosis was also strongly associated with self-harm (8·1, 7·0-9·4; I2=0%), particularly major depression (9·3, 2·9-29·5; I2=91%) and borderline personality disorder (9·2, 3·7-22·5; I2=81%). Prison-specific environmental risk factors for self-harm included solitary confinement (5·6, 2·7-11·6; I2=98%), disciplinary infractions (3·5, 1·2-9·7; I2=99%), and experiencing sexual or physical victimisation while in prison (3·2, 2·1-4·8; I2=44%). Sociodemographic (OR range 1·5-2·5) and criminological (1·8-2·3) factors were only modestly associated with self-harm in prison. We did not find clear evidence of publication bias. INTERPRETATION:The wide range of risk factors across clinical and custody-related domains underscores the need for a comprehensive, prison-wide approach towards preventing self-harm in prison. This approach should incorporate both population and targeted strategies, with multiagency collaboration between the services for mental health, social care, and criminal justice having a key role. FUNDING:Wellcome Trust.

Project description:ObjectivesProblem-solving skills training is adaptable, inexpensive and simple to deliver. However, its application with prisoners who self-harm is unknown. The study assessed the feasibility and acceptability of a problem-solving training (PST) intervention for prison staff and prisoners who self-harm, to inform the design of a large-scale study.Design and settingA mixed-methods design used routinely collected data, individual outcome measures, an economic protocol and qualitative interviews at four prisons in Yorkshire and Humber, UK.Participants(i) Front-line prison staff, (ii) male and female prisoners with an episode of self-harm in the previous 2 weeks.InterventionThe intervention comprised a 1 hour staff training session and a 30 min prisoner session using adapted workbooks and case studies.OutcomesWe assessed the study processes-coverage of training; recruitment and retention rates and adequacy of intervention delivery-and available data (completeness of outcome data, integrity of routinely collected data and access to the National Health Service (NHS) resource information). Prisoner outcomes assessed incidence of self-harm, quality of life and depression at baseline and at follow-up. Qualitative findings are presented elsewhere.ResultsRecruitment was higher than anticipated for staff n=280, but lower for prisoners, n=48. Retention was good with 43/48 (89%) prisoners completing the intervention, at follow-up we collected individual outcome data for 34/48 (71%) of prisoners. Access to routinely collected data was inconsistent. Prisoners were frequent users of NHS healthcare. The additional cost of training and intervention delivery was deemed minimal in comparison to 'treatment as usual'. Outcome measures of self-harm, quality of life and depression were found to be acceptable.ConclusionsThe intervention proved feasible to adapt. Staff training was delivered but on the whole it was not deemed feasible for staff to deliver the intervention. A large-scale study is warranted, but modifications to the implementation of the intervention are required.