Selection and Use of Firearm and Medication Locking Devices in a Lethal Means Counseling Intervention.

IF 1.7 4区 医学 Q3 PSYCHIATRY
Catherine Barber, Deborah Azrael, John Berrigan, Marian E Betz, Sara Brandspigel, Carol Runyan, Carmel Salhi, Mary Vriniotis, Matthew Miller
{"title":"Selection and Use of Firearm and Medication Locking Devices in a Lethal Means Counseling Intervention.","authors":"Catherine Barber,&nbsp;Deborah Azrael,&nbsp;John Berrigan,&nbsp;Marian E Betz,&nbsp;Sara Brandspigel,&nbsp;Carol Runyan,&nbsp;Carmel Salhi,&nbsp;Mary Vriniotis,&nbsp;Matthew Miller","doi":"10.1027/0227-5910/a000855","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b></b> <i>Background:</i> While some suicide prevention initiatives distribute locking devices for firearms and medication, little evidence exists to guide the selection of devices. <i>Aims:</i> This study aimed to describe safety standards for locking devices and compare parental acceptance rates for different types of devices. <i>Method:</i> As part of the larger SAFETY Study, behavioral health clinicians provided free locking devices to parents whose child was evaluated in the emergency department (ED) for a suicide-related or behavioral health-related problem. For logistical reasons, we changed the specific devices offered midstudy. Data on device use came from follow-up interviews with 226 parents. <i>Results:</i> Few effective standards exist for locking devices for home use; we could easily break into some. At follow-up, twice as many gun-owning parents were using ED-provided handgun lockboxes as cable locks (28% vs. 14%, <i>p</i> = .02). Overall, 55% of parents reported using an ED-provided medication lockbox, with more using the drawer-sized lockbox than the larger, steel toolbox (60% vs. 42%, <i>p</i> < .01). <i>Limitations:</i> Storage outcomes are from parents' self-report and from one state only. <i>Conclusion:</i> Parents appeared to prefer some devices over others. Our findings suggest the need for (a) effective safety standards, (b) affordable devices meeting these standards, and (c) further research on consumer preferences to ensure use.</p>","PeriodicalId":47943,"journal":{"name":"Crisis-The Journal of Crisis Intervention and Suicide Prevention","volume":"44 3","pages":"216-223"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Crisis-The Journal of Crisis Intervention and Suicide Prevention","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1027/0227-5910/a000855","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

Abstract

Background: While some suicide prevention initiatives distribute locking devices for firearms and medication, little evidence exists to guide the selection of devices. Aims: This study aimed to describe safety standards for locking devices and compare parental acceptance rates for different types of devices. Method: As part of the larger SAFETY Study, behavioral health clinicians provided free locking devices to parents whose child was evaluated in the emergency department (ED) for a suicide-related or behavioral health-related problem. For logistical reasons, we changed the specific devices offered midstudy. Data on device use came from follow-up interviews with 226 parents. Results: Few effective standards exist for locking devices for home use; we could easily break into some. At follow-up, twice as many gun-owning parents were using ED-provided handgun lockboxes as cable locks (28% vs. 14%, p = .02). Overall, 55% of parents reported using an ED-provided medication lockbox, with more using the drawer-sized lockbox than the larger, steel toolbox (60% vs. 42%, p < .01). Limitations: Storage outcomes are from parents' self-report and from one state only. Conclusion: Parents appeared to prefer some devices over others. Our findings suggest the need for (a) effective safety standards, (b) affordable devices meeting these standards, and (c) further research on consumer preferences to ensure use.

致命手段咨询干预中枪械和药物锁定装置的选择和使用。
背景:虽然一些自杀预防倡议分发枪支和药物的锁定装置,但很少有证据指导设备的选择。目的:本研究旨在描述锁定装置的安全标准,并比较不同类型装置的家长接受率。方法:作为更大的安全研究的一部分,行为健康临床医生为孩子在急诊科(ED)接受自杀相关或行为健康相关问题评估的父母提供免费的锁定装置。出于后勤方面的原因,我们改变了在学习期间提供的特定设备。有关电子设备使用的数据来自对226名家长的后续采访。结果:家用锁紧装置缺乏有效的标准;我们可以很容易地闯进去。在随访中,拥有枪支的父母使用ed提供的手枪锁盒的人数是使用电缆锁的两倍(28%对14%,p = 0.02)。总体而言,55%的家长报告使用ed提供的药物锁盒,使用抽屉大小的锁盒比使用更大的钢制工具箱的人更多(60%对42%,p < 0.01)。限制:存储结果来自父母的自我报告和一个州。结论:家长似乎更喜欢某些设备。我们的研究结果表明需要(a)有效的安全标准,(b)符合这些标准的负担得起的设备,以及(c)进一步研究消费者的偏好以确保使用。
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
5.10
自引率
6.70%
发文量
80
期刊介绍: A must for all who need to keep up on the latest findings from both basic research and practical experience in the fields of suicide prevention and crisis intervention! This well-established periodical’s reputation for publishing important articles on suicidology and crisis intervention from around the world is being further enhanced with the move to 6 issues per year (previously 4) in 2010. But over and above its scientific reputation, Crisis also publishes potentially life-saving information for all those involved in crisis intervention and suicide prevention, making it important reading for clinicians, counselors, hotlines, and crisis intervention centers.
×
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