We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Hospital-treated self-harm is common, costly and associated with repeated self-harm and suicide. Providing a comprehensive psychosocial assessment following self-harm is recommended by professional bodies and may improve outcomes.
Aims
To review the provision of psychosocial assessments after hospital-presenting self-harm and the extent to which macro-level factors indicative of service provision explain variability in these estimates.
Method
We searched five electronic databases to 3 January 2023 for studies reporting data on the proportion of patients and/or events that were provided a psychosocial assessment. Pooled weighted prevalence estimates were calculated with the random-effects model. Random-effects meta-regression was used to investigate between-study variability.
Results
119 publications (69 unique samples) were included. Across ages, two-thirds of patients had a psychosocial assessment (0.67, 95% CI 0.58–0.76). The proportion was higher for young people and older adults (0.75, 95% CI 0.36–0.99 and 0.83, 95% CI 0.48–1.00, respectively) compared with adults (0.64, 95% CI 0.54–0.73). For events, around half of all presentations had these assessments across the age range. No macro-level factor explained between-study heterogeneity.
Conclusions
There is room for improvement in the universal provision of psychosocial assessments for self-harm. This represents a missed opportunity to review and tailor aftercare supports for those at risk. Given the marked unexplained heterogeneity between studies, the person- and system-level factors that influence provision of psychosocial assessments after self-harm should be studied further.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.