Background: This study evaluated a multifaceted psychiatric intervention targeted at the complex medically ill identified by means of the INTERMED, an instrument to assess case complexity. Methods: Of 885 rheumatology inpatients and diabetes outpatients who were assessed for eligibility, 247 were identified as complex (INTERMED score >20) and randomized to the intervention (n = 125, 84 rheumatology and 41 diabetes patients) or care as usual (n = 122, 78 rheumatology and 44 diabetes patients). For the majority of the cases the multifaceted intervention consisted of an intervention conducted by a psychiatric liaison nurse and/or of referral to a liaison psychiatrist, followed by advice to the treating physician or organization of a multidisciplinary case conference. Baseline and follow-up at months 3, 6, 9 and 12 measured prevalence of major depression (Mini-International Neuropsychiatric Interview), depressive symptoms (Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression Rating Scale), physical and mental health (SF-36), quality of life (EuroQol), health care utilization and HbA_1c levels (diabetic patients). Results: Prevalence of major depression was reduced from 61% (T0) to 28% (T4) in the intervention group and remained stable in care as usual (57% at T0 to 50% at T4). Compared to care as usual, significant improvement over time was observed in the intervention group with regard to depressive symptoms (F = 11.9; p = 0.001), perception of physical (F = 5.7; p = 0.018) and mental health (F = 3.9; p = 0.047) and quality of life (F = 21.8; p < 0.001). Effects tended to be stronger in diabetes patients, in patients with baseline major depression and in patients with moderate INTERMED scores. Finally, hospital admissions occurred less often in the intervention group, reaching statistical significance for the period between 6 and 9 months of follow-up (p = 0.02). Conclusions: The results suggest that a psychiatric intervention targeted for complex medical patients can improve health outcomes.

Background Many types of intervention exist for suicide attempters, but they tend not to sufficiently consider patient’s views. Aim To identify useful components of a previously evaluated intervention after a suicide attempt from the patient’s views and to better understand the process of recovery. Method Forty-one interviews with suicide attempters were qualitatively analysed. Views of participants (i) on the components of the intervention (nurse case-management, joint crisis plan, meetings with relatives/network and follow-up calls) and (ii) their recovery were explored. The material was analysed by means of thematic analysis with a deductive-inductive approach. Results Participants valued the human and professional qualities of the nurse case-manager, and appreciated follow-up calls and meetings. However, their views diverged regarding for instance frequency of phone calls, or disclosing information or lack thereof. Interpersonal relationship, suicide attempters’ own resources and life changes emerged as core recovery factors. Discussion The study highlights the figure of an engaged clinician, with both professional and human commitment, aware that some suicide attempters put more emphasis on their own resources than on delivered health care. Conclusions Interventions should consider the clinician as the cornerstone of the tailored care valued by suicide attempters.

AIMS OF THE STUDY: Self-harm is a major risk factor for suicide but remains poorly documented. No data on self-harm in French-speaking Switzerland exist. To address this deficiency, the Swiss Federal Office of Public Health commissioned a specific self-harm monitoring programme. We present and discuss its implementation and first findings. METHODS: Every patient aged 18-65 years presenting for self-harm to the emergency departments of the Lausanne and Neuchâtel general hospitals were included in the monitoring programme over a 10-month period (December 2016 to September 2017). Clinicians collected anonymous sociodemographic and clinical data. RESULTS: The sample included 490 patients (54.9% female and 45.1% male) for 554 episodes of self-harm, showing a higher proportion of patients aged 18-34 (49.2%) than older age groups (35-49, 33.7% and 50-65, 17.1%). Patients were mostly single (56.1%) and in problematic socioeconomic situations (65.7%). Self-poisoning was the most commonly used method (58.2%) and was preferred by women (71% of females and 42.5% of males, Fisher's exact test, p <0.001) and the majority of patients (53.3%) had experienced at least one previous episode of self-harm. The self-harm rate was 220 per 100,000 inhabitants in Lausanne and 140 in Neuchâtel. Suicidal intent was clear for 50.6% of the overall sample, unclear for 25.1% and absent for 24.3%. It differed significantly between sites (χ 2 (2) = 9.068, p = 0.011) as Lausanne reported more incidents of unclear intent (27.7% versus 17.4% in Neuchâtel) and Neuchâtel more incidents with absence of intent (33.1% versus 21.3% in Lausanne). In Lausanne, patients more frequently resorted to methods such as jumping from a height (11.4%) and hanging (9%) than in Neuchâtel (1.6% and 4.9%, Fisher's exact test, p = 0.006).CONCLUSIONS: Our results are globally consistent with previous research on self-harm. We found significant intersite differences in methods, suicidal intent and self-harm rates. Our findings highlight the importance of implementing local self-harm monitoring to identify specific at-risk groups and develop targeted preventive intervention.

Suicide is a major cause of premature deaths worldwide and belongs to the top priority public health issues. While suicide attempt is the most important risk factor for completed suicide, intervention for suicide attempters (SA) have produced mixed results. Since an important proportion of SA request medical care, emergency units (EU) are an opportune setting to implement such interventions. This exploratory study evaluated the feasibility and acceptability of a multicomponent intervention for SA admitted to an EU. The intervention consisted of coordination by a case manager of a joint crisis plan (JCP), an early meeting with relatives and the existing care network, as well as phone contacts during 3 months after suicide attempt. Among 107 SA admitted to the emergency unit during the study period, 51 could not be included for logistical reason, 22 were excluded, and intervention was offered to 34. Of these, 15 refused the intervention, which was thus piloted with 19 SA. First-time attempters most frequently declined the intervention. Feasibility and acceptability of phone contacts and case manager were good, while JCPs and meetings were difficult to implement and perceived as less acceptable. Refusal pattern questions the global acceptability and is discussed: JCPs and meetings will have to be modified in order to improve their feasibility and acceptability, especially among first-time attempters.

Background: Depression is highly prevalent in patients with