{"title":"Services for assessment, aftercare, and psychological treatment following self-harm","authors":"Rachael Lilley, David Owens","doi":"10.1016/j.mppsy.2009.04.003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p><span>Effective intervention following self-harm is vital because of the strong link between self-harm and suicide. Unfortunately, services for people who self-harm have been poor in the UK and elsewhere. In 2004, the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence issued a guideline setting out clear standards for care following self-harm, many of which are included in this article. Whether this guideline has led to much needed improvements in care is not clear; there are few published experiences concerning implementation of the guidance but some studies suggest that care continues to be unsatisfactory. The barriers to implementation of self-harm guidelines are not clear, but the lack of definitive research evidence for effective treatments is a potential candidate. Several </span>systematic reviews<span> have failed to demonstrate a statistically significant reduction in fatal or non-fatal repetition following intervention after self-harm. Recent studies have, however, shown clear benefits for some psychological therapies – in particular for cognitive behavioural therapy with a problem-solving element. Promising results have also been demonstrated for some brief interventions designed to encourage uptake of aftercare following self-harm. This article sets out a little of the evidence for these potentially beneficial interventions, including recent developments in research evidence and implications for future research.</span></p></div>","PeriodicalId":88653,"journal":{"name":"Psychiatry (Abingdon, England)","volume":"8 7","pages":"Pages 246-251"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2009-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.mppsy.2009.04.003","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychiatry (Abingdon, England)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1476179309000676","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2
Abstract
Effective intervention following self-harm is vital because of the strong link between self-harm and suicide. Unfortunately, services for people who self-harm have been poor in the UK and elsewhere. In 2004, the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence issued a guideline setting out clear standards for care following self-harm, many of which are included in this article. Whether this guideline has led to much needed improvements in care is not clear; there are few published experiences concerning implementation of the guidance but some studies suggest that care continues to be unsatisfactory. The barriers to implementation of self-harm guidelines are not clear, but the lack of definitive research evidence for effective treatments is a potential candidate. Several systematic reviews have failed to demonstrate a statistically significant reduction in fatal or non-fatal repetition following intervention after self-harm. Recent studies have, however, shown clear benefits for some psychological therapies – in particular for cognitive behavioural therapy with a problem-solving element. Promising results have also been demonstrated for some brief interventions designed to encourage uptake of aftercare following self-harm. This article sets out a little of the evidence for these potentially beneficial interventions, including recent developments in research evidence and implications for future research.