Ambulance attendances resulting from self-harm after release from prison: a prospective data linkage study

Borschmann, Rohan; Young, Jesse T; Moran, Paul; Spittal, Matthew J; Heffernan, Ed; Mok, Katherine; Kinner, Stuart A

doi:10.1007/s00127-017-1383-z

Cited by 14 publications

(28 citation statements)

References 48 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…32 There are, however, few studies examining self-harm after release from incarceration, which makes direct comparison between regions almost impossible. 3,4 In Australia, there is no federal correctional system, as each state or territory system operates independently. In the State of Queensland, adults are asked on reception whether they have ever selfharmed; this is combined with records from previous incarcerations and, on some occasions, information gathered informally from police, mental health records and family members.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Accuracy and predictive value of incarcerated adults' accounts of their self-harm histories: findings froman Australian prospective data linkage study

et al. 2017

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Accuracy and predictive value of incarcerated adults' accounts of their self-harm histories: findings froman Australian prospective data linkage study

et al. 2017

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Australian research exploring the use of tertiary health services among PWID found PWID to be frequent users of emergency department (ED) and tertiary healthcare services and that ED presentations and hospital separations were most commonly related to mental and behavioural disorders (Nambiar et al, 2018; Nambiar et al, 2017). Similarly, a study of ambulance attendances among recently released prisoners found that one in twelve attendances involved self-harm or self-harm/suicidal ideation (Borschmann, Young, et al, 2017). Another Australian study found almost half of participants presenting to ED for self-harm following release from prison were previously identified in prison health records as being at risk of self-harm (Borschmann, Thomas, et al, 2017).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Lifetime prevalence and correlates of self-harm and suicide attempts among male prisoners with histories of injecting drug use

et al. 2018

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundHistories of self-harm and suicide attempts are common among people in prison in Australia, and substance dependence is an established risk factor for these lifetime experiences. We describe the prevalence of self-reported history of non-suicidal self-injury (NSSI) and suicide attempts in a cohort of men with recent histories of injecting drug use (IDU) imprisoned in Victoria, Australia. Baseline interviews from the Prison and Transition Health (PATH) prospective cohort study were conducted in the weeks prior to release from prison among 400 incarcerated men who reported regular IDU in the six months prior to incarceration.ResultsParticipants completed a researcher-administered structured questionnaire that collected information on sociodemographics, substance use patterns, and physical and mental health indicators. More than one third (37%) reported a history of NSSI and almost half of participants (47%) reported a history of suicide attempts. In multivariable Poisson regression models, a history of NSSI was associated with: being aged 30–39 years; moving accommodation three or more times in the year prior to current sentence; self-reporting a history of mental illness diagnosis; current poor psychiatric well-being; and self-reporting three or more previous drug overdoses. History of suicide attempts was significantly associated with: self-reporting a history of mental illness diagnosis; current poor psychiatric well-being; and self-reporting a history of 1–2 and > 3 drug overdoses.ConclusionWe observed a disconcertingly high lifetime prevalence of non-suicidal self-injury and suicide attempts among incarcerated males with a history of recent regular injecting drug use. Significant associations with indicators of mental illness and drug related harms support the need to prioritise in-prison screening and early intervention to reduce the risk of future harms for this population.

show abstract

“…Considering mental health issues, Borschmann et al (2017) noted the need for further research on clinical management and epidemiology of reactions to self-harm, clinical outcomes and care pathways for vulnerable patients. Likewise, Cohen (36) noted the absence of behavioural risk assessment techniques and recommended that terrorism violence prevention protocols should include such.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Defining and assessing vulnerability within law enforcement and public health organisations: a scoping review

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Historically, police departments focused solely on criminal justice issues. Recently, there has been a dynamic shift in focus, with Law Enforcement professional groups assuming more responsibility for tackling mental health and distress-related issues (that may arise because of mental health related problems and learning disabilities) alongside Public Health departments. While Law Enforcement has become a ‘last line of support’ and an increasing partner in mental health support, there is partnership working between law enforcement, psychology, and health professions in training and mental health service delivery. The term vulnerability is frequently used across Law Enforcement and Public Health (LEPH) to identify those in need of these services. Effective vulnerability assessment is therefore expected to prevent unintentional harmful health and criminal justice consequences and manage the negative impact of such in cases where prevention is not possible. This scoping review aimed to identify how vulnerability is defined and assessed across LEPH organisations. Results Vulnerability is context-specific from a Law Enforcement perspective, and person-specific from a Public Health perspective. Definitions of vulnerability are at best fragmented, while models for assessing vulnerability lack uniformity across LEPH. The implications are two-fold. For “vulnerable groups”, the lack of an evidence-based definition and assessment model could prevent access to relevant LEPH services, exacerbating issues of multiple vulnerabilities, co-morbidity, and/or dual diagnosis. All could inadvertently enable social exclusion of vulnerable groups from political discourse and policy interventions. The lack of consistency regarding vulnerability may result in reactive crisis responses as opposed to proactive preventative measures. Conclusions This scoping review exposes the complexities associated with defining and assessing vulnerability from a LEPH perspective, which are perceived and prioritised differently across the organizations. Future research must bridge this gap. Building on the establishment of a definition of vulnerability within the empirical literature, researchers ought to engage with service users, LEPH staff, and those engaged in policy making to craft effective vulnerability definitions and assessment models. Only through evidence based, co-produced definitions and assessment models for vulnerability can we ensure that best-practice, but also meaningful and feasible practice, in vulnerability assessment can be achieved.

show abstract

Ambulance attendances resulting from self-harm after release from prison: a prospective data linkage study

Cited by 14 publications

References 48 publications

Accuracy and predictive value of incarcerated adults' accounts of their self-harm histories: findings froman Australian prospective data linkage study

Accuracy and predictive value of incarcerated adults' accounts of their self-harm histories: findings froman Australian prospective data linkage study

Lifetime prevalence and correlates of self-harm and suicide attempts among male prisoners with histories of injecting drug use

Defining and assessing vulnerability within law enforcement and public health organisations: a scoping review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About