Enhancing Person-Centred Care in Suicide Prevention: A Nursing Perspective.

IF 2.6 4区 医学 Q1 NURSING
Matias Gay
{"title":"Enhancing Person-Centred Care in Suicide Prevention: A Nursing Perspective.","authors":"Matias Gay","doi":"10.1111/jpm.13168","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Suicide prevention within nursing has historically been dominated by biomedical models that emphasize risk assessment and symptom management. While these frameworks offer structure and liability reduction, they often fail to capture the deeply personal and existential dimensions of suicidality. The reliance on predictive tools with modest accuracy, such as the Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale (C-SSRS), has led to a gap between assessment and meaningful intervention. Critics argue that this model fosters a procedural approach that discourages patient disclosure and limits therapeutic engagement. In contrast, person-centered care (PCC) emphasizes relational trust, individualized understanding, and the integration of patient narratives into clinical decision-making. This paper examines the need to shift from standardized, symptom-focused approaches toward a dynamic, patient-centered framework.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This paper critically evaluates the limitations of biomedical suicide prevention strategies by synthesizing theoretical contributions from key suicidologists, including Edwin Shneidman, Antoon Leenaars, Konrad Michel, Igor Galynker, and David Jobes. Evidence-based, person-centered models such as the Collaborative Assessment and Management of Suicide (CAMS) and the Narrative Crisis Model (NCM) are explored in contrast to traditional suicide risk assessments. Additionally, barriers to implementing PCC in nursing-such as time constraints, administrative demands, and gaps in professional training-are examined.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>While biomedical models provide standardized risk management strategies, their over-reliance on quantifiable indicators fails to address suicidality's multidimensional nature. The predictive limitations of suicide screening tools often lead to overestimation or underestimation of risk, increasing the likelihood of missed intervention opportunities. Furthermore, systemic factors such as high-acuity environments and compassion fatigue contribute to nurses' challenges in engaging with person-centered interventions. Models like CAMS and NCM have demonstrated greater efficacy in fostering trust, enhancing clinical engagement, and addressing the subjective experiences of suicidal individuals, ultimately improving outcomes.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The limitations of traditional biomedical approaches underscore the necessity of integrating person-centered care into nursing practice. Suicide prevention should not be dictated solely by standardized risk assessments but should instead prioritize therapeutic alliance, empathy, and the co-construction of meaning. Nurses, given their frontline role in patient care, are uniquely positioned to transform suicide prevention through narrative-based interventions and compassionate engagement. However, achieving this paradigm shift requires institutional support, expanded nursing education, and systemic recognition of the importance of relational care. This paper advocates for a holistic approach that moves beyond risk prediction toward meaningful, person-centered interventions that address the lived experiences and psychological distress of individuals at risk for suicide.</p>","PeriodicalId":50076,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Psychiatric and Mental Health Nursing","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Psychiatric and Mental Health Nursing","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/jpm.13168","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"NURSING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Suicide prevention within nursing has historically been dominated by biomedical models that emphasize risk assessment and symptom management. While these frameworks offer structure and liability reduction, they often fail to capture the deeply personal and existential dimensions of suicidality. The reliance on predictive tools with modest accuracy, such as the Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale (C-SSRS), has led to a gap between assessment and meaningful intervention. Critics argue that this model fosters a procedural approach that discourages patient disclosure and limits therapeutic engagement. In contrast, person-centered care (PCC) emphasizes relational trust, individualized understanding, and the integration of patient narratives into clinical decision-making. This paper examines the need to shift from standardized, symptom-focused approaches toward a dynamic, patient-centered framework.

Methods: This paper critically evaluates the limitations of biomedical suicide prevention strategies by synthesizing theoretical contributions from key suicidologists, including Edwin Shneidman, Antoon Leenaars, Konrad Michel, Igor Galynker, and David Jobes. Evidence-based, person-centered models such as the Collaborative Assessment and Management of Suicide (CAMS) and the Narrative Crisis Model (NCM) are explored in contrast to traditional suicide risk assessments. Additionally, barriers to implementing PCC in nursing-such as time constraints, administrative demands, and gaps in professional training-are examined.

Results: While biomedical models provide standardized risk management strategies, their over-reliance on quantifiable indicators fails to address suicidality's multidimensional nature. The predictive limitations of suicide screening tools often lead to overestimation or underestimation of risk, increasing the likelihood of missed intervention opportunities. Furthermore, systemic factors such as high-acuity environments and compassion fatigue contribute to nurses' challenges in engaging with person-centered interventions. Models like CAMS and NCM have demonstrated greater efficacy in fostering trust, enhancing clinical engagement, and addressing the subjective experiences of suicidal individuals, ultimately improving outcomes.

Conclusions: The limitations of traditional biomedical approaches underscore the necessity of integrating person-centered care into nursing practice. Suicide prevention should not be dictated solely by standardized risk assessments but should instead prioritize therapeutic alliance, empathy, and the co-construction of meaning. Nurses, given their frontline role in patient care, are uniquely positioned to transform suicide prevention through narrative-based interventions and compassionate engagement. However, achieving this paradigm shift requires institutional support, expanded nursing education, and systemic recognition of the importance of relational care. This paper advocates for a holistic approach that moves beyond risk prediction toward meaningful, person-centered interventions that address the lived experiences and psychological distress of individuals at risk for suicide.

在预防自杀中加强以人为本的护理:护理的观点。
背景:护理中的自杀预防历来以强调风险评估和症状管理的生物医学模型为主。虽然这些框架提供了结构和责任的减少,但它们往往无法捕捉到自杀的深刻的个人和存在层面。对准确度不高的预测工具的依赖,如哥伦比亚自杀严重程度评定量表(C-SSRS),导致了评估和有意义的干预之间的差距。批评人士认为,这种模式助长了一种程序性的方法,阻碍了患者的披露,限制了治疗的参与。相反,以人为本的护理(PCC)强调关系信任、个性化理解和将患者叙述融入临床决策。本文探讨了从标准化、以症状为中心的方法转向动态、以患者为中心的框架的必要性。方法:通过综合主要自杀学家Edwin Shneidman、Antoon Leenaars、Konrad Michel、Igor Galynker和David Jobes的理论贡献,批判性地评估生物医学预防自杀策略的局限性。以证据为基础,以人为中心的模型,如自杀的协同评估和管理(CAMS)和叙事危机模型(NCM),与传统的自杀风险评估进行了对比研究。此外,研究了在护理中实施PCC的障碍,如时间限制、行政要求和专业培训方面的差距。结果:虽然生物医学模型提供了标准化的风险管理策略,但它们对量化指标的过度依赖未能解决自杀的多维性。自杀筛查工具的预测局限性常常导致对风险的高估或低估,从而增加了错过干预机会的可能性。此外,系统因素,如高敏锐度的环境和同情疲劳有助于护士挑战参与以人为本的干预。CAMS和NCM等模型在培养信任、增强临床参与和解决自杀个体的主观体验方面表现出更大的效果,最终改善了结果。结论:传统生物医学方法的局限性强调了将以人为本的护理纳入护理实践的必要性。自杀预防不应该仅仅由标准化的风险评估来决定,而应该优先考虑治疗联盟、同理心和共同构建意义。鉴于护士在病人护理中的一线作用,她们在通过基于叙述的干预和富有同情心的参与改变自杀预防方面处于独特的地位。然而,实现这种范式转变需要机构的支持,扩大护理教育,以及对关系护理重要性的系统认识。本文提倡一种整体的方法,超越风险预测,转向有意义的、以人为本的干预措施,解决有自杀风险的个人的生活经历和心理困扰。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.70
自引率
3.70%
发文量
75
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Psychiatric and Mental Health Nursing is an international journal which publishes research and scholarly papers that advance the development of policy, practice, research and education in all aspects of mental health nursing. We publish rigorously conducted research, literature reviews, essays and debates, and consumer practitioner narratives; all of which add new knowledge and advance practice globally. All papers must have clear implications for mental health nursing either solely or part of multidisciplinary practice. Papers are welcomed which draw on single or multiple research and academic disciplines. We give space to practitioner and consumer perspectives and ensure research published in the journal can be understood by a wide audience. We encourage critical debate and exchange of ideas and therefore welcome letters to the editor and essays and debates in mental health.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信