A Community's Response to Gatekeeper Training

J. M. Pullen, F. Gilje, E. Loftsgaarden, Nathan Stahley
{"title":"A Community's Response to Gatekeeper Training","authors":"J. M. Pullen, F. Gilje, E. Loftsgaarden, Nathan Stahley","doi":"10.4172/2471-9846.1000195","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Gatekeeper training remains fundamental to broad suicide prevention strategies. In this descriptive study, Question, Persuade, Refer, an evidence-based suicide prevention gatekeeper training program, was implemented community-wide in a state among the highest for suicide in the United States. Objective: To describe and compare cohort pre-post responses to suicide prevention gatekeeper training. Methods: Quantitative and qualitative data were collected from 2013 to 2016 utilizing pre-post training surveys (n=894). Results: Quantitative results were statistically significant (p<0.0001) with little between-cohort variance. Significant differences in pre-post ratings concerned ‘how to ask about suicide’, ‘how to persuade someone to receive help’ and ‘information about resources’. Post-survey qualitative results revealed a main theme of ‘appreciating learning about suicide prevention’. Conclusion: Findings from the ethnically homogenous sample are consistent with other research outcomes, adding to understandings from the few other published community-wide gatekeeper studies. Of note is that gatekeeper training is feasible, beneficial and cost-effective aligning with international and national initiatives. Future research is needed on the sustainability of gatekeeper training outcomes over time and its’ impact on suicide rates.","PeriodicalId":92236,"journal":{"name":"Journal of community & public health nursing","volume":"3 1","pages":"1-7"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of community & public health nursing","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4172/2471-9846.1000195","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Background: Gatekeeper training remains fundamental to broad suicide prevention strategies. In this descriptive study, Question, Persuade, Refer, an evidence-based suicide prevention gatekeeper training program, was implemented community-wide in a state among the highest for suicide in the United States. Objective: To describe and compare cohort pre-post responses to suicide prevention gatekeeper training. Methods: Quantitative and qualitative data were collected from 2013 to 2016 utilizing pre-post training surveys (n=894). Results: Quantitative results were statistically significant (p<0.0001) with little between-cohort variance. Significant differences in pre-post ratings concerned ‘how to ask about suicide’, ‘how to persuade someone to receive help’ and ‘information about resources’. Post-survey qualitative results revealed a main theme of ‘appreciating learning about suicide prevention’. Conclusion: Findings from the ethnically homogenous sample are consistent with other research outcomes, adding to understandings from the few other published community-wide gatekeeper studies. Of note is that gatekeeper training is feasible, beneficial and cost-effective aligning with international and national initiatives. Future research is needed on the sustainability of gatekeeper training outcomes over time and its’ impact on suicide rates.
社区对看门人培训的反应
背景:看门人培训仍然是广泛的自杀预防策略的基础。在这项描述性研究中,一个以证据为基础的自杀预防看门人培训项目,在美国自杀率最高的一个州,在社区范围内实施。目的:描述和比较队列对自杀预防看门人培训的前后反应。方法:采用岗前培训调查,收集2013 - 2016年的定量和定性资料(n=894)。结果:定量结果具有统计学意义(p<0.0001),队列间方差较小。在“如何询问自杀”、“如何说服别人接受帮助”和“有关资源的信息”方面,发帖前的评分存在显著差异。调查后的定性结果显示,学生的主题是“重视学习预防自杀”。结论:来自种族同质样本的发现与其他研究结果一致,增加了其他少数已发表的社区看门人研究的理解。值得注意的是,看门人培训是可行的、有益的和符合国际和国家倡议的成本效益高的。未来需要对看门人培训结果的可持续性及其对自杀率的影响进行研究。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信