BackgroundIt is increasingly recognised that intersectoral linkages between mental health and other health and support sectors are essential for providing effective care for individuals with severe and persistent mental illness. The extent to which intersectoral collaboration and approaches to achieve it are detailed in mental health policy has not yet been systematically examined.MethodsThirty-eight mental health policy documents from 22 jurisdictions in Australia, New Zealand, the United Kingdom, Ireland and Canada were identified via a web search. Information was extracted and synthesised on: the extent to which intersectoral collaboration was an objective or guiding principle of policy; the sectors acknowledged as targets for collaboration; and the characteristics of detailed intersectoral collaboration efforts.ResultsRecurring themes in objectives/guiding principles included a whole of government approach, coordination and integration of services, and increased social and economic participation. All jurisdictions acknowledged the importance of intersectoral collaboration, particularly with employment, education, housing, community, criminal justice, drug and alcohol, physical health, Indigenous, disability, emergency and aged care services. However, the level of detail provided varied widely. Where detailed strategies were described, the most common linkage mechanisms were joint service planning through intersectoral coordinating committees or liaison workers, interagency agreements, staff training and joint service provision.ConclusionsSectors and mechanisms identified for collaboration were largely consistent across jurisdictions. Little information was provided about strategies for accountability, resourcing, monitoring and evaluation of intersectoral collaboration initiatives, highlighting an area for further improvement. Examples of collaboration detailed in the policies provide a useful resource for other countries.

No abstract

Introduction There was and still is much speculation about the COVID-19 pandemic impact on suicide rates. We aimed to assess the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on suicide rates around the world. Methods We sourced real-time suicide data from countries or countries areas through a systematic internet search (official websites of Ministries of health, police agencies, and government-run statistics agencies or equivalents), recourse to our networks (e.g. ICSPRC) and the published literature (a living systematic review). We used an interrupted time-series analysis to model the trend in monthly suicides before COVID-19 in each country or country area, comparing the expected number of suicides derived from the model with the observed number of suicides in the early months of the pandemic (from April 1 to July 31, 2020, in the primary analysis). We have now updated this work to cover the first 15 months of the pandemic and stratified analyses by age and sex and method. We will present findings from the new updated data (35 countries) at the conference. Results Initially we sourced data from 21 countries (16 high-income and five upper-middle-income countries). Rate ratios (RRs) and 95% CIs based on the observed versus expected numbers of suicides showed no evidence of a significant increase in risk of suicide since the pandemic began in any country or area. There was statistical evidence of a decrease in suicide compared with the expected number in 12 countries or areas. Conclusions This was the first study to examine suicides occurring in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic in multiple countries. Early on high-income and upper-middle-income countries, suicide numbers remained largely unchanged or declined compared with the expected levels based on the pre-pandemic period. We need to remain vigilant and be poised to respond as the longer-term mental health and economic effects of the pandemic unfold. We will present updated findings with more recent data.

No abstract