How to avoid abandonment claims when terminating care

Article Type
Changed
Fri, 09/01/2023 - 01:15
Display Headline
How to avoid abandonment claims when terminating care

Psychiatric clinicians may unilaterally decide to end a treatment relationship with a patient when the relationship is no longer therapeutic, such as when the patient does not adhere to treatment, repeatedly misses appointments, exhibits abusive behaviors, or fails to pay for treatment.1 Claims of abandonment can arise if ending the treatment relationship is not executed properly. Abandonment is the termination of a treatment relationship with a patient who remains in need of treatment, has no suitable substitute treatment, and subsequently experiences damages as a result of the termination.2 When a patient terminates a treatment relationship, there are no legal bases for abandonment claims.3 In this article, I provide a few practical tips for properly terminating the doctor-patient relationship to limit the likelihood of claims of abandonment.

Know your jurisdiction’s requirements for terminating the relationship. Each state has its own legal definition of a doctor-patient relationship as well as requirements for ending it. Abandonment claims are unfounded in the absence of a doctor-patient relationship.3 Contact the appropriate licensing board to determine what your state’s regulatory requirements are. If necessary, consult with your attorney or a risk management professional for guidance.4

Communicate clearly. Communicate with your patient about the end of the treatment relationship in a clear and consistent manner, both verbally and in writing, because a termination should be viewed as a formal, documented event.3 Except in situations requiring immediate termination, psychiatric clinicians should inform the patient about the reason(s) for termination,4 the need for continued treatment,3 and the type of recommended treatment.3 This discussion should be summarized in a termination letter given to the patient that includes termination language, referral sources, the end date of treatment, and a request for authorization to release a copy of the patient’s medical records to their new clinician.3,4

Give adequate time, set boundaries, and document. Thirty days is generally considered adequate time for a patient to find a new clinician,5 unless the patient lives in an area where there is a shortage of psychiatric clinicians, in which case a longer time period would be appropriate.3 Ensure your patient has a sufficient supply of medication(s) until they establish care with a new clinician.4 Offer to provide emergency care for a reasonable period of time during the termination process unless a safety concern requires immediate termination.4 Avoid situations in which the patient attempts to re-enter your care. Document the reason for the termination in your progress notes and keep a copy of the termination letter in the patient’s medical record.4

References

1. Mossman D. ‘Firing’ a patient: may a psychiatrist unilaterally terminate care? Current Psychiatry. 2010;9(12):18,20,22,29.

2. Van Susteren L. Psychiatric abandonment: pitfalls and prevention. Psychiatric Times. 2001;18(8). Accessed April 30, 2023. https://www.psychiatrictimes.com/view/psychiatric-abandonment-pitfalls-and-prevention

3. Stankowski J, Sorrentino R. Abandonment and unnecessary commitment. In: Ash P, Frierson RL, Hatters Friedman S, eds. Malpractice and Liability in Psychiatry. Springer Nature Publishing; 2022:129-135.

4. Funicelli A. Avoiding abandonment claim: how to properly terminate patients from your practice. Psychiatric News. 2022;57(12):13,41. https://psychnews.psychiatryonline.org/doi/10.1176/appi.pn.2022.12.12.23

5. American Psychiatric Association. APA Quick Practice Guide: Ending the Physician/Patient Relationship. 2014. Accessed April 30, 2023. https://www.psychiatry.org/File%20Library/Psychiatrists/Practice/Practice-Management/Practice-Management-Guides/GeneralIssues-terminating-patient-relationships.pdf

Article PDF
Author and Disclosure Information

Dr. Joshi is Professor of Clinical Psychiatry and Associate Director, Forensic Psychiatry Fellowship, Department of Neuropsychiatry and Behavioral Science, University of South Carolina School of Medicine, Columbia, South Carolina.

Disclosures
The author reports no financial relationships with any companies whose products are mentioned in this article, or with manufacturers of competing products.

Issue
Current Psychiatry - 22(9)
Publications
Page Number
13
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

Dr. Joshi is Professor of Clinical Psychiatry and Associate Director, Forensic Psychiatry Fellowship, Department of Neuropsychiatry and Behavioral Science, University of South Carolina School of Medicine, Columbia, South Carolina.

Disclosures
The author reports no financial relationships with any companies whose products are mentioned in this article, or with manufacturers of competing products.

Author and Disclosure Information

Dr. Joshi is Professor of Clinical Psychiatry and Associate Director, Forensic Psychiatry Fellowship, Department of Neuropsychiatry and Behavioral Science, University of South Carolina School of Medicine, Columbia, South Carolina.

Disclosures
The author reports no financial relationships with any companies whose products are mentioned in this article, or with manufacturers of competing products.

Article PDF
Article PDF

Psychiatric clinicians may unilaterally decide to end a treatment relationship with a patient when the relationship is no longer therapeutic, such as when the patient does not adhere to treatment, repeatedly misses appointments, exhibits abusive behaviors, or fails to pay for treatment.1 Claims of abandonment can arise if ending the treatment relationship is not executed properly. Abandonment is the termination of a treatment relationship with a patient who remains in need of treatment, has no suitable substitute treatment, and subsequently experiences damages as a result of the termination.2 When a patient terminates a treatment relationship, there are no legal bases for abandonment claims.3 In this article, I provide a few practical tips for properly terminating the doctor-patient relationship to limit the likelihood of claims of abandonment.

Know your jurisdiction’s requirements for terminating the relationship. Each state has its own legal definition of a doctor-patient relationship as well as requirements for ending it. Abandonment claims are unfounded in the absence of a doctor-patient relationship.3 Contact the appropriate licensing board to determine what your state’s regulatory requirements are. If necessary, consult with your attorney or a risk management professional for guidance.4

Communicate clearly. Communicate with your patient about the end of the treatment relationship in a clear and consistent manner, both verbally and in writing, because a termination should be viewed as a formal, documented event.3 Except in situations requiring immediate termination, psychiatric clinicians should inform the patient about the reason(s) for termination,4 the need for continued treatment,3 and the type of recommended treatment.3 This discussion should be summarized in a termination letter given to the patient that includes termination language, referral sources, the end date of treatment, and a request for authorization to release a copy of the patient’s medical records to their new clinician.3,4

Give adequate time, set boundaries, and document. Thirty days is generally considered adequate time for a patient to find a new clinician,5 unless the patient lives in an area where there is a shortage of psychiatric clinicians, in which case a longer time period would be appropriate.3 Ensure your patient has a sufficient supply of medication(s) until they establish care with a new clinician.4 Offer to provide emergency care for a reasonable period of time during the termination process unless a safety concern requires immediate termination.4 Avoid situations in which the patient attempts to re-enter your care. Document the reason for the termination in your progress notes and keep a copy of the termination letter in the patient’s medical record.4

Psychiatric clinicians may unilaterally decide to end a treatment relationship with a patient when the relationship is no longer therapeutic, such as when the patient does not adhere to treatment, repeatedly misses appointments, exhibits abusive behaviors, or fails to pay for treatment.1 Claims of abandonment can arise if ending the treatment relationship is not executed properly. Abandonment is the termination of a treatment relationship with a patient who remains in need of treatment, has no suitable substitute treatment, and subsequently experiences damages as a result of the termination.2 When a patient terminates a treatment relationship, there are no legal bases for abandonment claims.3 In this article, I provide a few practical tips for properly terminating the doctor-patient relationship to limit the likelihood of claims of abandonment.

Know your jurisdiction’s requirements for terminating the relationship. Each state has its own legal definition of a doctor-patient relationship as well as requirements for ending it. Abandonment claims are unfounded in the absence of a doctor-patient relationship.3 Contact the appropriate licensing board to determine what your state’s regulatory requirements are. If necessary, consult with your attorney or a risk management professional for guidance.4

Communicate clearly. Communicate with your patient about the end of the treatment relationship in a clear and consistent manner, both verbally and in writing, because a termination should be viewed as a formal, documented event.3 Except in situations requiring immediate termination, psychiatric clinicians should inform the patient about the reason(s) for termination,4 the need for continued treatment,3 and the type of recommended treatment.3 This discussion should be summarized in a termination letter given to the patient that includes termination language, referral sources, the end date of treatment, and a request for authorization to release a copy of the patient’s medical records to their new clinician.3,4

Give adequate time, set boundaries, and document. Thirty days is generally considered adequate time for a patient to find a new clinician,5 unless the patient lives in an area where there is a shortage of psychiatric clinicians, in which case a longer time period would be appropriate.3 Ensure your patient has a sufficient supply of medication(s) until they establish care with a new clinician.4 Offer to provide emergency care for a reasonable period of time during the termination process unless a safety concern requires immediate termination.4 Avoid situations in which the patient attempts to re-enter your care. Document the reason for the termination in your progress notes and keep a copy of the termination letter in the patient’s medical record.4

References

1. Mossman D. ‘Firing’ a patient: may a psychiatrist unilaterally terminate care? Current Psychiatry. 2010;9(12):18,20,22,29.

2. Van Susteren L. Psychiatric abandonment: pitfalls and prevention. Psychiatric Times. 2001;18(8). Accessed April 30, 2023. https://www.psychiatrictimes.com/view/psychiatric-abandonment-pitfalls-and-prevention

3. Stankowski J, Sorrentino R. Abandonment and unnecessary commitment. In: Ash P, Frierson RL, Hatters Friedman S, eds. Malpractice and Liability in Psychiatry. Springer Nature Publishing; 2022:129-135.

4. Funicelli A. Avoiding abandonment claim: how to properly terminate patients from your practice. Psychiatric News. 2022;57(12):13,41. https://psychnews.psychiatryonline.org/doi/10.1176/appi.pn.2022.12.12.23

5. American Psychiatric Association. APA Quick Practice Guide: Ending the Physician/Patient Relationship. 2014. Accessed April 30, 2023. https://www.psychiatry.org/File%20Library/Psychiatrists/Practice/Practice-Management/Practice-Management-Guides/GeneralIssues-terminating-patient-relationships.pdf

References

1. Mossman D. ‘Firing’ a patient: may a psychiatrist unilaterally terminate care? Current Psychiatry. 2010;9(12):18,20,22,29.

2. Van Susteren L. Psychiatric abandonment: pitfalls and prevention. Psychiatric Times. 2001;18(8). Accessed April 30, 2023. https://www.psychiatrictimes.com/view/psychiatric-abandonment-pitfalls-and-prevention

3. Stankowski J, Sorrentino R. Abandonment and unnecessary commitment. In: Ash P, Frierson RL, Hatters Friedman S, eds. Malpractice and Liability in Psychiatry. Springer Nature Publishing; 2022:129-135.

4. Funicelli A. Avoiding abandonment claim: how to properly terminate patients from your practice. Psychiatric News. 2022;57(12):13,41. https://psychnews.psychiatryonline.org/doi/10.1176/appi.pn.2022.12.12.23

5. American Psychiatric Association. APA Quick Practice Guide: Ending the Physician/Patient Relationship. 2014. Accessed April 30, 2023. https://www.psychiatry.org/File%20Library/Psychiatrists/Practice/Practice-Management/Practice-Management-Guides/GeneralIssues-terminating-patient-relationships.pdf

Issue
Current Psychiatry - 22(9)
Issue
Current Psychiatry - 22(9)
Page Number
13
Page Number
13
Publications
Publications
Article Type
Display Headline
How to avoid abandonment claims when terminating care
Display Headline
How to avoid abandonment claims when terminating care
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.
Conference Recap Checkbox
Not Conference Recap
Clinical Edge
Display the Slideshow in this Article
Medscape Article
Display survey writer
Reuters content
Disable Inline Native ads
WebMD Article
Article PDF Media

Medical record documentation: What to do, and what to avoid

Article Type
Changed
Wed, 10/12/2022 - 11:19
Display Headline
Medical record documentation: What to do, and what to avoid

Medical record documentation serves as a reminder of previous discussions with patients and what happened during their visits, a reimbursement justification for services, a communication tool to coordinate care with current and future clinicians, and a basis for defense in legal or regulatory matters.1,2 Documentation should be thorough, accurate, timely, and objective, with the ultimate goal of communicating our thoughts in an easily understood manner to other clinicians or attorneys.2 If we fail to achieve this goal, we may inadvertently give the impression that our care was hurried, incomplete, or thoughtless.2

Although not an exhaustive list, this article outlines strategies to employ and practices to avoid in our documentation efforts so we may enhance our defense in case of litigation and ensure the smooth transition of care for our patients.

Strategies to employ

Proper and accurate documentation details the course of patient care, and we should describe our thoughts in a clear and logical manner. Doing so minimizes the risk of misinterpretation by other clinicians or attorneys. Make sure the documentation of each appointment details the reason(s) for the patient’s visit, the effectiveness of treatment, possible treatment nonadherence, our clinical assessment, treatment consent, changes to the patient’s treatment plan, follow-up plans, reasons for not pursuing certain actions (eg, hospitalization), and a suicide risk assessment (and/or a violence risk assessment, if clinically indicated).2 Document missed or rescheduled appointments, and telephone and electronic contact with patients. Also be sure to use only commonly approved abbreviations.2 Document these items sooner rather than later because doing so improves the credibility of your charting.1 If you are handwriting notes, add the date and time to each encounter and make sure your handwriting is legible. Describe the behaviors of patients in objective and nonjudgmental terms.3 Documenting quotes from patients can convey crucial information about what was considered when making clinical decisions.1

Practices to avoid

If there is a need to make changes to previous entries, ensure these corrections are not mistaken for alterations. Each health care institution has its own policy for making corrections and addenda to medical records. Corrections to a patient’s medical record are acceptable, provided they are done appropriately, as I outlined in a previous Pearls article.4 Minimize or eliminate the copying and pasting of information; doing so can improve the efficiency of our documentation, but the practice can undermine the quality of the medical record, increase the risk of outdated and repetitive information being included, lead to clinical errors, and lead to overbilling of services.5 Finally, be sure to avoid speculation, personal commentary about patients and their family members, and language with negative connotations (unless such language is a direct quote from the patient).2,3

References

1. Mossman D. Tips to make documentation easier, faster, and more satisfying. Current Psychiatry. 2008;7(2):80,84-86.

2. Staus C. Documentation: your very best defense. Psychiatric News. 2022;57(4):7,19.

3. Nelson KJ. How to use patient-centered language in documentation. Current Psychiatry. 2011;10(10):70.

4. Joshi KG. Metadata, malpractice claims, and making changes to the EHR. Current Psychiatry. 2021;20(3):e1-e3. doi:10.12788/cp.0106

5. Neal D. Do’s and don’ts of electronic documentation. Psychiatric News. 2021;56(8):7.

Article PDF
Author and Disclosure Information

Dr. Joshi is Professor of Clinical Psychiatry and Associate Director, Forensic Psychiatry Fellowship, Department of Neuropsychiatry and Behavioral Science, University of South Carolina School of Medicine, Columbia, South Carolina.

Disclosures
The author reports no financial relationships with any companies whose products are mentioned in this article, or with manufacturers of competing products.

Issue
Current Psychiatry - 21(10)
Publications
Page Number
46,48
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

Dr. Joshi is Professor of Clinical Psychiatry and Associate Director, Forensic Psychiatry Fellowship, Department of Neuropsychiatry and Behavioral Science, University of South Carolina School of Medicine, Columbia, South Carolina.

Disclosures
The author reports no financial relationships with any companies whose products are mentioned in this article, or with manufacturers of competing products.

Author and Disclosure Information

Dr. Joshi is Professor of Clinical Psychiatry and Associate Director, Forensic Psychiatry Fellowship, Department of Neuropsychiatry and Behavioral Science, University of South Carolina School of Medicine, Columbia, South Carolina.

Disclosures
The author reports no financial relationships with any companies whose products are mentioned in this article, or with manufacturers of competing products.

Article PDF
Article PDF

Medical record documentation serves as a reminder of previous discussions with patients and what happened during their visits, a reimbursement justification for services, a communication tool to coordinate care with current and future clinicians, and a basis for defense in legal or regulatory matters.1,2 Documentation should be thorough, accurate, timely, and objective, with the ultimate goal of communicating our thoughts in an easily understood manner to other clinicians or attorneys.2 If we fail to achieve this goal, we may inadvertently give the impression that our care was hurried, incomplete, or thoughtless.2

Although not an exhaustive list, this article outlines strategies to employ and practices to avoid in our documentation efforts so we may enhance our defense in case of litigation and ensure the smooth transition of care for our patients.

Strategies to employ

Proper and accurate documentation details the course of patient care, and we should describe our thoughts in a clear and logical manner. Doing so minimizes the risk of misinterpretation by other clinicians or attorneys. Make sure the documentation of each appointment details the reason(s) for the patient’s visit, the effectiveness of treatment, possible treatment nonadherence, our clinical assessment, treatment consent, changes to the patient’s treatment plan, follow-up plans, reasons for not pursuing certain actions (eg, hospitalization), and a suicide risk assessment (and/or a violence risk assessment, if clinically indicated).2 Document missed or rescheduled appointments, and telephone and electronic contact with patients. Also be sure to use only commonly approved abbreviations.2 Document these items sooner rather than later because doing so improves the credibility of your charting.1 If you are handwriting notes, add the date and time to each encounter and make sure your handwriting is legible. Describe the behaviors of patients in objective and nonjudgmental terms.3 Documenting quotes from patients can convey crucial information about what was considered when making clinical decisions.1

Practices to avoid

If there is a need to make changes to previous entries, ensure these corrections are not mistaken for alterations. Each health care institution has its own policy for making corrections and addenda to medical records. Corrections to a patient’s medical record are acceptable, provided they are done appropriately, as I outlined in a previous Pearls article.4 Minimize or eliminate the copying and pasting of information; doing so can improve the efficiency of our documentation, but the practice can undermine the quality of the medical record, increase the risk of outdated and repetitive information being included, lead to clinical errors, and lead to overbilling of services.5 Finally, be sure to avoid speculation, personal commentary about patients and their family members, and language with negative connotations (unless such language is a direct quote from the patient).2,3

Medical record documentation serves as a reminder of previous discussions with patients and what happened during their visits, a reimbursement justification for services, a communication tool to coordinate care with current and future clinicians, and a basis for defense in legal or regulatory matters.1,2 Documentation should be thorough, accurate, timely, and objective, with the ultimate goal of communicating our thoughts in an easily understood manner to other clinicians or attorneys.2 If we fail to achieve this goal, we may inadvertently give the impression that our care was hurried, incomplete, or thoughtless.2

Although not an exhaustive list, this article outlines strategies to employ and practices to avoid in our documentation efforts so we may enhance our defense in case of litigation and ensure the smooth transition of care for our patients.

Strategies to employ

Proper and accurate documentation details the course of patient care, and we should describe our thoughts in a clear and logical manner. Doing so minimizes the risk of misinterpretation by other clinicians or attorneys. Make sure the documentation of each appointment details the reason(s) for the patient’s visit, the effectiveness of treatment, possible treatment nonadherence, our clinical assessment, treatment consent, changes to the patient’s treatment plan, follow-up plans, reasons for not pursuing certain actions (eg, hospitalization), and a suicide risk assessment (and/or a violence risk assessment, if clinically indicated).2 Document missed or rescheduled appointments, and telephone and electronic contact with patients. Also be sure to use only commonly approved abbreviations.2 Document these items sooner rather than later because doing so improves the credibility of your charting.1 If you are handwriting notes, add the date and time to each encounter and make sure your handwriting is legible. Describe the behaviors of patients in objective and nonjudgmental terms.3 Documenting quotes from patients can convey crucial information about what was considered when making clinical decisions.1

Practices to avoid

If there is a need to make changes to previous entries, ensure these corrections are not mistaken for alterations. Each health care institution has its own policy for making corrections and addenda to medical records. Corrections to a patient’s medical record are acceptable, provided they are done appropriately, as I outlined in a previous Pearls article.4 Minimize or eliminate the copying and pasting of information; doing so can improve the efficiency of our documentation, but the practice can undermine the quality of the medical record, increase the risk of outdated and repetitive information being included, lead to clinical errors, and lead to overbilling of services.5 Finally, be sure to avoid speculation, personal commentary about patients and their family members, and language with negative connotations (unless such language is a direct quote from the patient).2,3

References

1. Mossman D. Tips to make documentation easier, faster, and more satisfying. Current Psychiatry. 2008;7(2):80,84-86.

2. Staus C. Documentation: your very best defense. Psychiatric News. 2022;57(4):7,19.

3. Nelson KJ. How to use patient-centered language in documentation. Current Psychiatry. 2011;10(10):70.

4. Joshi KG. Metadata, malpractice claims, and making changes to the EHR. Current Psychiatry. 2021;20(3):e1-e3. doi:10.12788/cp.0106

5. Neal D. Do’s and don’ts of electronic documentation. Psychiatric News. 2021;56(8):7.

References

1. Mossman D. Tips to make documentation easier, faster, and more satisfying. Current Psychiatry. 2008;7(2):80,84-86.

2. Staus C. Documentation: your very best defense. Psychiatric News. 2022;57(4):7,19.

3. Nelson KJ. How to use patient-centered language in documentation. Current Psychiatry. 2011;10(10):70.

4. Joshi KG. Metadata, malpractice claims, and making changes to the EHR. Current Psychiatry. 2021;20(3):e1-e3. doi:10.12788/cp.0106

5. Neal D. Do’s and don’ts of electronic documentation. Psychiatric News. 2021;56(8):7.

Issue
Current Psychiatry - 21(10)
Issue
Current Psychiatry - 21(10)
Page Number
46,48
Page Number
46,48
Publications
Publications
Article Type
Display Headline
Medical record documentation: What to do, and what to avoid
Display Headline
Medical record documentation: What to do, and what to avoid
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.
Conference Recap Checkbox
Not Conference Recap
Clinical Edge
Display the Slideshow in this Article
Medscape Article
Display survey writer
Reuters content
Disable Inline Native ads
WebMD Article
Article PDF Media

Risk factors for nonsuicidal self-injury: A review of the evidence

Article Type
Changed
Mon, 08/01/2022 - 12:15
Display Headline
Risk factors for nonsuicidal self-injury: A review of the evidence

Nonsuicidal self-injury (NSSI) is the direct and deliberate destruction of body tissue without intent to die.1 Common forms of NSSI include cutting, burning, scraping/scratching skin, biting, hitting, and interfering with wound healing.2 Functional theories suggest that NSSI temporarily alleviates overwhelming negative emotions and can produce feelings of relief, resulting in a reinforcing effect.3

NSSI has been shown to be a risk factor for future suicide attempts.4 A 2018 study found that NSSI is associated with an increased risk of subsequent suicidal ideation (odds ratio [OR] 2.8), suicide plan (OR 3.0), and suicide attempt (OR 5.5).5 NSSI is also associated with individuals who had suicidal ideation and formed a suicide plan, and individuals who had a suicide plan and attempted suicide (ORs 1.7 to 2.1).5 Another study found that 70% of adolescents who engage in NSSI have attempted suicide during their lifetime, and 55% have multiple attempts.6

Given the overlap between suicide attempts and NSSI, performing a thorough suicide risk assessment (which is beyond the scope of this article) is crucial. This article describes the static and dynamic risk factors for NSSI in adolescents and adults, which can help us perform a suicide risk assessment and allow us to formulate an appropriate treatment plan that includes safety-based interventions.

Risk factors for nonsuicidal self-injury in adolescents

NSSI risk factors for adolescents

From developing sexual identity and undergoing puberty to achieving increased independence from their parents and developing a sense of autonomy, adolescents undergo many biological, psychological, and social changes before reaching adulthood.7 Data suggest that NSSI often begins in adolescence, with a typical onset at age 13 or 14.3 Community studies show that one-third to one-half of adolescents in the United States have engaged in NSSI.8,9 Previously, NSSI during adolescence was associated with 3 major diagnostic categories: eating disorders, developmental disabilities, and borderline personality disorder (BPD).10 However, recent data suggest that NSSI is also common outside of these categories. Here we describe static and dynamic risk factors for NSSI in adolescents (Table 111-42). Table 211-42 summarizes the studies of NSSI in adolescents that we reviewed.

Nonsuicidal self-injury in adolescents: Select studies

Static risk factors

Female adolescents and adults engage in NSSI at higher rates than males. The difference is larger in clinical populations compared to the general population.11

A large portion of research about NSSI has been conducted in studies in which the majority of participants were White.12 Most studies report a higher prevalence of NSSI among non-Hispanic White youth,13 but some suggest other ethnic groups may also experience high rates of self-harm and NSSI.13-15 Several studies have demonstrated high rates of self-harm among South Asian adult females compared with White adult females, but this difference may be less pronounced in adolescents.14 One study in the United Kingdom found that White females age 10 to 14 had higher rates of self-harm compared to South Asian females,14 while another found that risk and rates of self-harm in young South Asian people varied by city and country of origin.15 Young Black females15 and young Black males13 also may be at an increased risk of self-harm. One review found that Black females were more likely to self-harm than Asian or White groups.15

Several studies suggest that sexual minority adolescents (SMA) (eg, lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer) are at greater risk for NSSI than heterosexual adolescents.16 SMA have been shown to engage in a significantly greater frequency of NSSI and more types of NSSI than heterosexual adolescents.16 Furthermore, on the Inventory of Statements about Self-Injury, SMA self-reported using NSSI for intrapersonal functions (eg, for affect regulation, antisuicide, self-punishment) significantly greater than their heterosexual peers; however, there were no significant differences between the 2 groups on interpersonal functions (eg, autonomy, interpersonal boundaries, peer bonding, sensation-seeking).16

Continue to: Transgender and gender nonconfirming...

 

 

Transgender and gender nonconfirming (GNC) youth are at a particularly high risk for NSSI; 30% to 45.5% of transgender adolescents report self-injury.17 Factors shown to distinguish transgender/GNC youth who engage in NSSI from those who do not include having a mental health problem, depression, running away from home, substance use, lower self-esteem/greater self-criticism, experiencing transphobia victimization, and having more interpersonal problems.18,19 Among transgender/GNC youth, those whose biological sex is female are more likely to report NSSI than those whose biological sex is male (ie, transgendered adolescent males are more likely to report NSSI than transgendered adolescent females).18,19

Most forms of childhood maltreatment have been associated with NSSI. In a recently published review, Liu et al20 found that childhood maltreatment (including sexual abuse, physical abuse, emotional abuse, and physical neglect) was associated with an increased risk for NSSI. However, conflicting evidence suggests that when confounders are removed, only childhood emotional abuse was directly associated with NSSI.21 Current evidence is modest for childhood emotional neglect as a risk factor for NSSI.20

Increasing research is investigating the biological processes that may be implicated in NSSI. Some studies suggest that endogenous opioids,22 monoamine neurotransmitters,22 and the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis23 may play a role in NSSI. Compared to healthy controls, adolescents engaging in NSSI have been shown to have lower pain intensity (P = .036), higher pain thresholds (P = .040), and lower beta-endorphins (endogenous opioid hormones involved in mediating stress and pain) (P = .002).24 There may be alterations in the HPA axis among adolescents who engage in NSSI, more specifically stronger cortisol awakening responses.23 Both functional and standard MRI have been used to study the neurobiology of NSSI. One study demonstrated differences in functional connectivity between brain areas linked to neuroregulation of emotions in adolescents who engage in NSSI,25 while another found volume reduction in the insula of these adolescents, which suggests a possible neurobiological reason for impulsivity and the increased risk of suicidal behavior.26

Dynamic risk factors

Research has repeatedly shown bullying is a risk factor for NSSI.27 One study found that younger children who were victimized reported significantly more NSSI than older children.28 New data suggest that perpetrators of bullying are also at risk for deliberate self-harm behavior (SHB), which this study defined as a behavior that is intended to cause self-harm but without suicidal intent and having a nonfatal outcome.29 Victims of cyberbullying also are at a greater risk for self-harm, suicidal behaviors, and suicide attempt.30 To a lesser extent, cyberbullying perpetrators are at greater risk for suicidal behaviors and suicidal ideation.30 Bullying is a risk factor for NSSI not only in adolescence, but also in adulthood. Lereya et al31 found that victims of bullying in childhood and early adolescence were more likely to have mental health problems (including anxiety and depression) and more likely to engage in SHB—which this study defined as hurting oneself on purpose in any way—as adults.

The effects of internet use on adolescents’ mental health also has been investigated. A recent review that explored the relationship between all types of internet use (general use, internet addiction, social media, self-harm websites, forums, etc) and SHB/suicidal behavior found that young people with internet addiction, high levels of internet use, and a tendency to view websites with self-harm or suicidal content were at higher risk of engaging in SHB/suicidal behavior.32 This study did not use a specific definition for SHB or suicidal behavior.32

Continue to: Membership in certain youth...

 

 

Membership in certain youth subcultures (eg, emo or goth) has been evaluated as potential risk factors for depression and deliberate self-harm. Bowes et al33 found that for each unit increase in goth affiliation (not at all, not very much, somewhat, more than somewhat, very much), youth were 1.52 times more likely to engage in SHB; these researchers also reported a dose-response association between goth identification and future SHB. This study asked participants if they have ever tried to harm or hurt themselves in any manner, but did not distinguish between individuals who had harmed themselves with and without suicidal intent.33

Personality traits such as impulsiveness and loneliness have been linked to NSSI among adolescents.34,35 A recent study found that adolescents who met the proposed DSM-5 diagnostic criteria for NSSI scored higher on the Barratt Impulsiveness Scale, specifically in measures of:

  • motor impulsiveness (ie, acting without thinking)
  • attentional impulsiveness (ie, making decisions quickly)
  • impulsiveness due to lack of planning (ie, failure to plan for the future).34

This study also found that adolescents who identified as being lonely based on scores on the Brazilian Loneliness Scale were at a higher risk for NSSI.34

A recent systematic review (32 studies) and meta-analysis (9 studies) found that school absenteeism was associated with a risk of self-harm (pooled aOR 1.37, P = .01) and suicidal ideation (pooled aOR 1.20, P = .03).36 This study suggested that school absenteeism, an important marker of social exclusion, was associated with both SHB and suicidal ideation in young people.36 It defined SHB as any act of self-injury or self-poisoning, regardless of intent.36

Finally, family-related factors have been associated with an increased risk of NSSI. One study of 11,814 children age 9 and 10 revealed that high family conflict (OR 1.09; 95% CI, 1.05 to 1.14) and low parental monitoring (OR 0.95; 95% CI, 0.93 to 0.98) were associated with NSSI.37 A smaller, community-based study found that adolescents with NSSI reported significantly less maternal support and warmth than nonclinical controls, but a cause-and-effect relationship has not yet been determined.38 Parental history alone may influence adolescents’ risk of NSSI. A study that included nearly 76,000 youth found that adolescents with perceived parental alcohol problems had higher odds of self-injury, suicidal ideation, and suicide attempts.39 Adolescents exposed to maternal or paternal adversities were also at a higher risk of self-harm (hazard ratio 1.5 to 5.4 among males, 1.7 to 3.9 among females).40

Continue to: NSSI risk factors for adults

 

 

NSSI risk factors for adults

Although data regarding the prevalence of NSSI in adults are lacking, available studies report a 12-month prevalence of 0.9%2 and a lifetime prevalence of 5.5% to 5.9%.43 There is a significant overlap in risk factors for NSSI in adolescent and adult populations, but there are also many important differences. The static and dynamic risk factors for NSSI in adults are described in Table 3.44-66 Table 444-66 summarizes the studies of NSSI in adults that we reviewed.

Risk factors for nonsuicidal self-injury in adults

Static risk factors

Research findings regarding the prevalence of NSSI based on gender are varied. For years, it has been believed that women are more likely to engage in NSSI than men. Recent meta-analyses that have examined this relationship closely found that the gender difference is larger for clinical samples compared to community samples and more pronounced in younger individuals.11

Nonsuicidal self-injury in adults: Select studies

As is the case with adolescents, there may be ethnic variations in rates of self-harm and NSSI among adults. A 2013 study by Chesin et al44 found that Asian and White young adults experience higher rates of NSSI than their Hispanic and Black counterparts. Evidence suggests that relative rates of self-harm for older South Asian adults are lower than in older White adults.15

Compared to heterosexual or cisgender individuals, members of sexual and gender minorities have a higher past-year and lifetime prevalence of NSSI.45 One study found that the weighted effect size between sexual orientation and NSSI had an OR of 3 (95% CI, 2.46 to 3.66), indicating a medium-to-large effect.46 Bisexual and transgender individuals appear to be at the highest risk for NSSI when compared to members of other sexual and gender minority groups.45 One review that included mostly cross-sectional studies found that individuals identifying as bisexual had up to 6 times the odds of engaging in NSSI when compared to those of other sexual orientations.47

Incarceration is a risk factor for NSSI. The rates of NSSI in criminal justice settings are higher (up to 61%) than in the general adult population (approximately 4%).48 Recent research found that NSSI serves similar functions in correctional and non-correctional settings, primarily to regulate emotions.48 However, there is also evidence of higher rates of NSSI being motivated by an attempt to influence the environment (ie, engaging in NSSI in order to be transferred to another prison unit) compared to NSSI in community settings.48

Continue to: Though less robust than data...

 

 

Though less robust than data published regarding adolescents, the role of biological processes in adults engaging in NSSI has also been studied. A 2021 study by Störkel et al49 found that levels of salivary beta-endorphins were significantly lower in adults immediately before engaging in NSSI compared to after NSSI. Furthermore, adults who engage in NSSI have lower levels of met-enkephalin (P < .01), an opioid growth factor, compared to adults who have never engaged in NSSI.22

Dynamic risk factors

Individuals who engage in NSSI often report substance use, but there is little data on whether substance use is an independent risk factor for NSSI. Although limited, recent evidence suggests illicit substance use in both adolescents41 and adults50 increases risk for NSSI. Richardson et al50 found that the use of barbiturates, opiates, and sedatives significantly increased the frequency of NSSI, whereas use of marijuana, phencyclidine, and medications used to treat anxiety significantly increased the severity of NSSI. A smaller study conducted in South Africa found that individuals who engage in substance use and NSSI were more likely to be male (P < .001).51

Eating disorders and NSSI are highly comorbid.52 The lifetime prevalence of NSSI among individuals with eating disorders ranges from 20.6%to 37.1%.52,53 Results are inconsistent regarding which eating disorders (if any) are greater risk factors for NSSI. One study found that the prevalence of NSSI in patients with bulimia nervosa was 32.7% (95% CI, 26.9% to 39.1%) vs 21.8% in patients with anorexia nervosa (95% CI, 18.5% to 25.6%).54 Another study found that individuals with binge eating/purging–type eating disorders reported engaging in NSSI more frequently than those with other types of eating disorders.55 Among patients with eating disorders who reported NSSI, risk factors included younger age of onset, more negative self-evaluation, more impulsive behavior, concomitant substance use, history of suicide attempts, childhood abuse, and peer aggression.53,55 Body image dissatisfaction and self-criticism, even in individuals not formally diagnosed with an eating disorder, are small but significant predictors of NSSI.56,57

Mood disorders have also been linked to NSSI.58,59 Anxiety disorders (including generalized anxiety disorder, social phobia, panic disorder, and agoraphobia) as well as anxiety-related disorders such as obsessive-compulsive disorder have been significantly associated with NSSI (P < .001), but this relationship decreased in strength when mood instability was removed as a confounder.58 Among patients with anxiety and anxiety-related disorders, panic disorder and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) have shown the strongest association with NSSI, with pooled aORs of 2.67 and 2.06, respectively.59

Recent studies have examined the association of other mental health disorders and symptoms with NSSI, including psychosis60 and dissociative symptoms.61 One study found that paranoia, thought control, and auditory hallucinations were significantly associated with NSSI60; however, after controlling for concomitant BPD, only paranoia was significantly associated with NSSI.60 Individuals diagnosed with dissociative disorders were more likely than patients without such disorders to endorse NSSI and suicide attempts.61

Continue to: Emotional dysregulation...

 

 

Emotional dysregulation (EDR)—defined as difficulty understanding, recognizing, and managing one’s emotions—has been researched extensively in relation to NSSI.62 A recent review that included studies of both adolescents and adults reported a significant association between EDR and NSSI, with an OR of 2.40 (95% CI, 2.01 to 2.86).62 A larger effect size was observed between EDR and lifetime NSSI (OR 3.21; 95% CI, 2.63 to 3.91) compared to past-year NSSI (OR 2.32; 95% CI, 1.84 to 2.92).62 Patient age, sex, and sample type (clinical vs community) were not significant moderators of strength between the reported associations.62

Studies examining intimate partner violence (IPV) and NSSI have found that young adults who engage in IPV (both as victims and as perpetrators) are more likely to report NSSI.63-65 Researchers have proposed that anxiety over abandonment may explain this relationship.64 A recent study found that individuals with bidirectional IPV (ie, both victimization and perpetration) engaged in NSSI at a higher prevalence than those engaging in unidirectional IPV or no IPV.65 This suggests that relationship violence in general (rather than just being a victim of IPV) may be a risk factor for NSSI.65

Finally, studies suggest that adolescents and adults who have sleep problems (insomnia, short sleep duration, long sleep onset latency, waking after sleep onset, and poor quality sleep) are more likely to report self-harm or NSSI than those without sleep problems.42,66 In adults, this relationship is partially mediated by depressive symptoms, EDR, and PTSD.66 In adolescents, depressive symptoms are a mediator for this relationship.42

Bottom Line

Nonsuicidal self-injury (NSSI) is a significant health concern due to its association with suicide attempts. Although there are similarities in NSSI risk factors between adolescents and adults, there are also important differences. Understanding these differences is necessary to develop appropriate treatment plans.

Related Resources

  • American Foundation for Suicide Prevention. https://afsp.org/
  • Cipriano A, Cella S, Cotrufo P. Nonsuicidal self-injury: a systematic review. Front Psych. 2017;8:1946. doi:10.3389/ fpsyg.2017.01946
  • Gold LH, Frierson RL, eds. Textbook of Suicide Risk Assessment and Management. 3rd ed. American Psychiatric Association Publishing; 2020.
References

1. Nock MK. Self-injury. Annu Rev Clin Psychol. 2010;6:339-363.
2. Klonsky ED. Non-suicidal self-injury in United States adults: prevalence, sociodemographics, topography and functions. Psychol Med. 2011;41(9):1981-1986.
3. Klonsky ED. Nonsuicidal self-injury: what we know, and what we need to know. Can J Psychiatry. 2014;59(11):565-568.
4. Wilkinson P, Kelvin R, Roberts C, et al. Clinical and psychosocial predictors of suicide attempts and nonsuicidal self-injury in the Adolescent Depression Antidepressants and Psychotherapy Trial (ADAPT). Am J Psychiatry. 2011;168(5):495-501.
5. Kiekens G, Hasking P, Boyes M, et al. The associations between non-suicidal self-injury and first onset suicidal thoughts and behaviors. J Affect Disord. 2018;239:171-179.
6. Nock MK, Joiner TE, Gordon KH, et al. Non-suicidal self-injury among adolescents: diagnostic correlates and relation to suicide attempts. Psychiatry Res. 2006;144(1):65-72.
7. Christie D, Viner R. Adolescent development. BMJ. 2005;330(7486):301-304.
8. Yates TM, Tracy AJ, Luthar SS. Nonsuicidal self-injury among “privileged” youths: longitudinal and cross-sectional approaches to developmental process. J Consult Clin Psychol. 2008;76(1):52-62.
9. Lloyd-Richardson EE, Perrine N, Dierker L, et al. Characteristics and functions of non-suicidal self-injury in a community sample of adolescents. Psychol Med. 2007;37(8):1183-1192.
10. Peterson J, Freedenthal S, Sheldon C, et al. Nonsuicidal self injury in adolescents. Psychiatry(Edgmont). 2008;5(11):20-26.
11. Bresin K, Schoenleber M. Gender differences in the prevalence of nonsuicidal self-injury: a meta-analysis. Clin Psychol Rev. 2015;38:55-64.
12. Gholamrezaei M, Stefano JD, Heath NL. Nonsuicidal self-injury across cultures and ethnic and racial minorities: a review. Int J Psychol. 2015;52(4):316-326.
13. Rojas-Velasquez DA, Pluhar EI, Burns PA, et al. Nonsuicidal self-injury among African American and Hispanic adolescents and young adults: a systematic review. Prev Sci. 2021;22:367-377.
14. Bhui K, McKenzie K, Rasul F. Rates, risk factors & methods of self harm among minority ethnic groups in the UK: a systematic review. BMC Public Health. 2007;7:336.
15. Cooper J, Murphy E, Webb R, et al. Ethnic differences in self-harm, rates, characteristics and service provision: three-city cohort study. Br J Psychiatry. 2010;197(3):212-218.
16. Peters JR, Mereish EH, Krek MA, et al. Sexual orientation differences in non-suicidal self-injury, suicidality, and psychosocial factors among an inpatient psychiatric sample of adolescents. Psychiatry Res. 2020;284:112664.
17. Connolly MD, Zervos MJ, Barone 2nd CJ, et al. The mental health of transgender youth: advances in understanding. J Adolesc Health. 2016;59(5):489-495.
18. Taliaferro LA, McMorris BJ, Rider GN, et al. Risk and protective factors for self-harm in a population-based sample of transgender youth. Archives Suicide Res. 2019;23(2):203-221.
19. Arcelus J, Claes L, Witcomb GL, et al. Risk factors for non-suicidal self-injury among trans youth. J Sex Med. 2016;13(3):402-412.
20. Liu RT, Scopelliti KM, Pittman SK, et al. Childhood maltreatment and non-suicidal self-injury: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet Psychiatry. 2018;5(1):51-64.
21. Thomassin K, Shaffer A, Madden A, et al. Specificity of childhood maltreatment and emotion deficit in nonsuicidal self-injury in an inpatient sample of youth. Psychiatry Res. 2016;244:103-108.
22. Stanley B, Sher L, Wilson S, et al. Non-suicidal self-injurious behavior, endogenous opioids and monoamine neurotransmitters. J Affect Disord. 2010;124(1-2):134-140.
23. Reichl C, Heyer A, Brunner R, et al. Hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis, childhood adversity and adolescent nonsuicidal self-injury. Psychoneuroendocrinology. 2016;74:203-211.
24. van der Venne P, Balint A, Drews E, et al. Pain sensitivity and plasma beta-endorphin in adolescent non-suicidal self-injury. J Affect Disord. 2021;278:199-209.
25. Osuch E, Ford K, Wrath A, et al. Functional MRI of pain application in youth who engaged in repetitive non-suicidal self-injury vs. psychiatric controls. Psychiatry Res. 2014;223(2):104-112.
26. Ando A, Reichl C, Scheu F, et al. Regional grey matter volume reduction in adolescents engaging in non-suicidal self-injury. Psychiatry Res Neuroimaging. 2018;280:48-55.
27. Karanikola MNK, Lyberg A, Holm A-L, et al. The association between deliberate self-harm and school bullying victimization and the mediating effect of depressive symptoms and self-stigma: a systematic review. BioMed Res Int. 2018;4745791. doi: 10.1155/2018/4745791
28. van Geel M, Goemans A, Vedder P. A meta-analysis on the relation between peer victimization and adolescent non-suicidal self-injury. Psychiatry Res. 2015;230(2):364-368.
29. Heerde JA, Hemphill SA. Are bullying perpetration and victimization associated with adolescent deliberate self-harm? A meta-analysis. Arch Suicide Res. 2019;23(3):353-381.
30. John A, Glendenning AC, Marchant A, et al. Self-harm, suicidal behaviours, and cyberbullying in children and young people: systematic review. J Med Internet Res. 2018;20(4):e129. doi: 10.2196/jmir.9044
31. Lereya ST, Copeland WE, Costello EJ, et al. Adult mental health consequences of peer bullying and maltreatment in childhood: two cohorts in two countries. Lancet Psychiatry. 2015;2(6):524-531.
32. Marchant A, Hawton K, Stewart A, et al. A systematic review of the relationship between internet use, self-harm and suicidal behaviour in young people: the good, the bad and the unknown. PLoS One. 2017;12(8):e0181722. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0181722
33. Bowes L, Carnegie R, Pearson R, et al. Risk of depression and self-harm in teenagers identifying with goth subculture: a longitudinal cohort study. Lancet Psychiatry. 2015;2(9):793-800.
34. Costa RPO, Peixoto ALRP, Lucas CCA, et al. Profile of non-suicidal self-injury in adolescents: interface with impulsiveness and loneliness. J Pediatr (Rio J). 2021;97(2):184-190.
35. McHugh CM, Lee RSC, Hermens DF, et al. Impulsivity in the self-harm and suicidal behavior of young people: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Psychiatr Res. 2019;116:51-60.
36. Epstein S, Roberts E, Sedgwick R, et al. School absenteeism as a risk factor for self-harm and suicidal ideation in children and adolescents: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2020;29(9):1175-1194.
37. DeVille DC, Whalen D, Breslin FJ, et al. Prevalence and family-related factors associated with suicidal ideation, suicide attempts, and self-injury in children aged 9 to 10 years. JAMA Netw Open. 2020;3(2):e1920956. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2019.20956
38. Tschan T, Schmid M, In-Albon T. Parenting behavior in families of female adolescents with nonsuicidal self-injury in comparison to a clinical and a nonclinical control group. Child Adolesc Psychiatry Ment Health. 2015;9:17.
39. Pisinger V, Hawton K, Tolstrup JS. Self-injury and suicide behavior among young people with perceived parental alcohol problems in Denmark: a school-based survey. Eur Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2018;27(2):201-208.
40. Pitkänen J, Remes H, Aaltonen M, et al. Experience of mater­nal and paternal adversities in childhood as determinants of self-harm in adolescence and young adulthood. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2019;73(11):1040-1046.
41. Monto MA, McRee N, Deryck FS. Nonsuicidal self-injury among a representative sample of US adolescents, 2015. Am J Public Health. 2018;108(8):1042-1048.
42. Hysing M, Sivertsen B, Stormark KM, et al. Sleep problems and self-harm in adolescence. Br J Psychiatry. 2015;207(4):306-312.
43. Swannell SV, Martin GE, Page A, et al. Prevalence of nonsuicidal self-injury in nonclinical samples: systematic review, meta-analysis and meta-regression. Suicide Life Threat Behav. 2014;44(3):273-303.
44. Chesin M, Moster A, Jeglic E. Non-suicidal self-injury among ethnically and racially diverse emerging adults: do factors unique to the minority experience matter? Current Psychology. 2013;32:318-328.
45. Liu RT, Sheehan AE, Walsh RFL, et al. Prevalence and correlates of non-suicidal self-injury among lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender individuals: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Psychol Rev. 2019;74:101-783. doi:10.1016/j.cpr.2019.101783
46. Batejan KL, Jarvi SM, Swenson LP. Sexual orientation and non-suicidal self-injury: a meta-analytic review. Arch Suicide Res. 2015;19(2):131-150.
47. Dunlop BJ, Hartley S, Oladokun O, et al. Bisexuality and non-suicidal self-injury (NSSI): a narrative synthesis of associated variables and a meta-analysis of risk. J Affect Disord. 2020;276:1159-1172.
48. Dixon-Gordon K, Harrison N, Roesch R. Non-suicidal self-injury within offender populations: a systematic review. Int J Forensic Ment Health. 2012;11(1):33-50.
49. Störkel LM, Karabatsiakis A, Hepp K, et al. Salivary beta-endorphin in nonsuicidal self-injury: an ambulatory assessment study. Neuropsychopharmacology. 2021;46(7):1357-1363.
50. Richardson E, DePue MK, Therriault DJ, et al. The influence of substance use on engagement in non-suicidal self-injury (NSI) in adults. Subst Use Misuse. 2020;55(1):89-94.
51. Breet E, Bantjes J, Lewis I. Chronic substance use and self-harm in a primary health care setting. Afr J Prim Health Care Fam Med. 2018;10(1):e1-e9. doi: 10.4102/phcfm.v10i1.1544
52. Pérez S, Marco JH, Cañabate M. Non-suicidal self-injury in patients with eating disorders: prevalence, forms, functions, and body image correlates. Compr Psychiatry. 2018;84:32-38.
53. Islam MA, Steiger H, Jimenez-Murcia S, et al. Non-suicidal self-injury in different eating disorder types: relevance of personality traits and gender. Eur Eat Disord Rev. 2015;23(6):553-560.
54. Cucchi A, Ryan D, Konstantakopoulos G, et al. Lifetime prevalence of non-suicidal self-injury in patients with eating disorders: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Psychol Med. 2016;46(7):1345-1358.
55. Vieira AI, Machado BC, Machado PPP, et al. Putative risk factors for non-suicidal self-injury in eating disorders. Eur Eat Disord Rev. 2017;25(6):544-550.
56. Black EB, Garratt M, Beccaria G, et al. Body image as a predictor of nonsuicidal self-injury in women: a longitudinal study. Compr Psychiatry. 2019;88:83-89.
57. Zelkowitz RL, Cole DA. Self-criticism as a transdiagnostic process in nonsuicidal self-injury and disordered eating: systematic review and meta-analysis. Suicide Life Threat Behav. 2019;49(1):310-327.
58. Peters EM, Bowen R, Balbuena L. Mood instability contributes to impulsivity, non-suicidal self-injury, and binge eating/purging in people with anxiety disorders. Psychol Psychother. 2019;92(3):422-438.
59. Bentley KH, Cassiello-Robbins CF, Vittorio L, et al. The association between nonsuicidal self-injury and the emotional disorders: a meta-analytic review. Clin Psychol Rev. 2015;37:72-88.
60. Koyanagi A, Stickley A, Haro JM. Psychotic-like experiences and nonsuicidal self-injury in England: results from a national survey [corrected]. PLoS One. 2015;10(12):e0145533. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0145533
61. Calati R, Bensassi I, Courtet P. The link between dissociation and both suicide attempts and non-suicidal self-injury: meta-analyses. Psychiatry Res. 2017;251:103-114.
62. Wolff JC, Thompson E, Thomas SA, et al. Emotion dysregulation and non-suicidal self-injury: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Psychiatry. 2019;59:25-36.
63. Vaughn MG, Salas-Wright CP, DeLisi M, et al. Deliberate self-harm and the nexus of violence, victimization, and mental health problems in the United States. Psychiatry Res. 2015;225(3):588-595.
64. Levesque C, Lafontaine M-F, Bureau J-F, et al. The influence of romantic attachment and intimate partner violence on nonsuicidal self-injury in young adults. J Youth Adolesc. 2010;39(5):474-483.
65. Carranza AB, Wallis CRD, Jonnson MR, et al. Nonsuicidal self-injury and intimate partner violence: directionality of violence and motives for self-injury. J Interpers Violence. 2020;886260520922372. doi: 10.1177/0886260520922372
66. Khazaie H, Zakiei A, McCall WV, et al. Relationship between sleep problems and self-injury: a systematic review. Behav Sleep Med. 2020;1-16. doi: 10.1080/15402002.2020.1822360

Article PDF
Author and Disclosure Information

Radhika J. Kothadia, MD
PGY-3 General Psychiatry Resident
Prisma Health/University of South Carolina School of Medicine
Columbia, South Carolina

Kaustubh G. Joshi, MD
Associate Professor of Clinical Psychiatry
Associate Program Director, Forensic Psychiatry Fellowship
Department of Neuropsychiatry and Behavioral Science
University of South Carolina School of Medicine
Columbia, South Carolina

Richard L. Frierson, MD
Alexander G. Donald Professor of Clinical Psychiatry
Vice Chair for Academic Affairs
Program Director, Forensic Psychiatry Fellowship
Department of Neuropsychiatry and Behavioral Science
University of South Carolina School of Medicine
Columbia, South Carolina

Disclosures
The authors report no financial relationships with any companies whose products are mentioned in this article, or with manufacturers of competing products.

Issue
Current Psychiatry - 21(8)
Publications
Topics
Page Number
15-25
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

Radhika J. Kothadia, MD
PGY-3 General Psychiatry Resident
Prisma Health/University of South Carolina School of Medicine
Columbia, South Carolina

Kaustubh G. Joshi, MD
Associate Professor of Clinical Psychiatry
Associate Program Director, Forensic Psychiatry Fellowship
Department of Neuropsychiatry and Behavioral Science
University of South Carolina School of Medicine
Columbia, South Carolina

Richard L. Frierson, MD
Alexander G. Donald Professor of Clinical Psychiatry
Vice Chair for Academic Affairs
Program Director, Forensic Psychiatry Fellowship
Department of Neuropsychiatry and Behavioral Science
University of South Carolina School of Medicine
Columbia, South Carolina

Disclosures
The authors report no financial relationships with any companies whose products are mentioned in this article, or with manufacturers of competing products.

Author and Disclosure Information

Radhika J. Kothadia, MD
PGY-3 General Psychiatry Resident
Prisma Health/University of South Carolina School of Medicine
Columbia, South Carolina

Kaustubh G. Joshi, MD
Associate Professor of Clinical Psychiatry
Associate Program Director, Forensic Psychiatry Fellowship
Department of Neuropsychiatry and Behavioral Science
University of South Carolina School of Medicine
Columbia, South Carolina

Richard L. Frierson, MD
Alexander G. Donald Professor of Clinical Psychiatry
Vice Chair for Academic Affairs
Program Director, Forensic Psychiatry Fellowship
Department of Neuropsychiatry and Behavioral Science
University of South Carolina School of Medicine
Columbia, South Carolina

Disclosures
The authors report no financial relationships with any companies whose products are mentioned in this article, or with manufacturers of competing products.

Article PDF
Article PDF

Nonsuicidal self-injury (NSSI) is the direct and deliberate destruction of body tissue without intent to die.1 Common forms of NSSI include cutting, burning, scraping/scratching skin, biting, hitting, and interfering with wound healing.2 Functional theories suggest that NSSI temporarily alleviates overwhelming negative emotions and can produce feelings of relief, resulting in a reinforcing effect.3

NSSI has been shown to be a risk factor for future suicide attempts.4 A 2018 study found that NSSI is associated with an increased risk of subsequent suicidal ideation (odds ratio [OR] 2.8), suicide plan (OR 3.0), and suicide attempt (OR 5.5).5 NSSI is also associated with individuals who had suicidal ideation and formed a suicide plan, and individuals who had a suicide plan and attempted suicide (ORs 1.7 to 2.1).5 Another study found that 70% of adolescents who engage in NSSI have attempted suicide during their lifetime, and 55% have multiple attempts.6

Given the overlap between suicide attempts and NSSI, performing a thorough suicide risk assessment (which is beyond the scope of this article) is crucial. This article describes the static and dynamic risk factors for NSSI in adolescents and adults, which can help us perform a suicide risk assessment and allow us to formulate an appropriate treatment plan that includes safety-based interventions.

Risk factors for nonsuicidal self-injury in adolescents

NSSI risk factors for adolescents

From developing sexual identity and undergoing puberty to achieving increased independence from their parents and developing a sense of autonomy, adolescents undergo many biological, psychological, and social changes before reaching adulthood.7 Data suggest that NSSI often begins in adolescence, with a typical onset at age 13 or 14.3 Community studies show that one-third to one-half of adolescents in the United States have engaged in NSSI.8,9 Previously, NSSI during adolescence was associated with 3 major diagnostic categories: eating disorders, developmental disabilities, and borderline personality disorder (BPD).10 However, recent data suggest that NSSI is also common outside of these categories. Here we describe static and dynamic risk factors for NSSI in adolescents (Table 111-42). Table 211-42 summarizes the studies of NSSI in adolescents that we reviewed.

Nonsuicidal self-injury in adolescents: Select studies

Static risk factors

Female adolescents and adults engage in NSSI at higher rates than males. The difference is larger in clinical populations compared to the general population.11

A large portion of research about NSSI has been conducted in studies in which the majority of participants were White.12 Most studies report a higher prevalence of NSSI among non-Hispanic White youth,13 but some suggest other ethnic groups may also experience high rates of self-harm and NSSI.13-15 Several studies have demonstrated high rates of self-harm among South Asian adult females compared with White adult females, but this difference may be less pronounced in adolescents.14 One study in the United Kingdom found that White females age 10 to 14 had higher rates of self-harm compared to South Asian females,14 while another found that risk and rates of self-harm in young South Asian people varied by city and country of origin.15 Young Black females15 and young Black males13 also may be at an increased risk of self-harm. One review found that Black females were more likely to self-harm than Asian or White groups.15

Several studies suggest that sexual minority adolescents (SMA) (eg, lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer) are at greater risk for NSSI than heterosexual adolescents.16 SMA have been shown to engage in a significantly greater frequency of NSSI and more types of NSSI than heterosexual adolescents.16 Furthermore, on the Inventory of Statements about Self-Injury, SMA self-reported using NSSI for intrapersonal functions (eg, for affect regulation, antisuicide, self-punishment) significantly greater than their heterosexual peers; however, there were no significant differences between the 2 groups on interpersonal functions (eg, autonomy, interpersonal boundaries, peer bonding, sensation-seeking).16

Continue to: Transgender and gender nonconfirming...

 

 

Transgender and gender nonconfirming (GNC) youth are at a particularly high risk for NSSI; 30% to 45.5% of transgender adolescents report self-injury.17 Factors shown to distinguish transgender/GNC youth who engage in NSSI from those who do not include having a mental health problem, depression, running away from home, substance use, lower self-esteem/greater self-criticism, experiencing transphobia victimization, and having more interpersonal problems.18,19 Among transgender/GNC youth, those whose biological sex is female are more likely to report NSSI than those whose biological sex is male (ie, transgendered adolescent males are more likely to report NSSI than transgendered adolescent females).18,19

Most forms of childhood maltreatment have been associated with NSSI. In a recently published review, Liu et al20 found that childhood maltreatment (including sexual abuse, physical abuse, emotional abuse, and physical neglect) was associated with an increased risk for NSSI. However, conflicting evidence suggests that when confounders are removed, only childhood emotional abuse was directly associated with NSSI.21 Current evidence is modest for childhood emotional neglect as a risk factor for NSSI.20

Increasing research is investigating the biological processes that may be implicated in NSSI. Some studies suggest that endogenous opioids,22 monoamine neurotransmitters,22 and the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis23 may play a role in NSSI. Compared to healthy controls, adolescents engaging in NSSI have been shown to have lower pain intensity (P = .036), higher pain thresholds (P = .040), and lower beta-endorphins (endogenous opioid hormones involved in mediating stress and pain) (P = .002).24 There may be alterations in the HPA axis among adolescents who engage in NSSI, more specifically stronger cortisol awakening responses.23 Both functional and standard MRI have been used to study the neurobiology of NSSI. One study demonstrated differences in functional connectivity between brain areas linked to neuroregulation of emotions in adolescents who engage in NSSI,25 while another found volume reduction in the insula of these adolescents, which suggests a possible neurobiological reason for impulsivity and the increased risk of suicidal behavior.26

Dynamic risk factors

Research has repeatedly shown bullying is a risk factor for NSSI.27 One study found that younger children who were victimized reported significantly more NSSI than older children.28 New data suggest that perpetrators of bullying are also at risk for deliberate self-harm behavior (SHB), which this study defined as a behavior that is intended to cause self-harm but without suicidal intent and having a nonfatal outcome.29 Victims of cyberbullying also are at a greater risk for self-harm, suicidal behaviors, and suicide attempt.30 To a lesser extent, cyberbullying perpetrators are at greater risk for suicidal behaviors and suicidal ideation.30 Bullying is a risk factor for NSSI not only in adolescence, but also in adulthood. Lereya et al31 found that victims of bullying in childhood and early adolescence were more likely to have mental health problems (including anxiety and depression) and more likely to engage in SHB—which this study defined as hurting oneself on purpose in any way—as adults.

The effects of internet use on adolescents’ mental health also has been investigated. A recent review that explored the relationship between all types of internet use (general use, internet addiction, social media, self-harm websites, forums, etc) and SHB/suicidal behavior found that young people with internet addiction, high levels of internet use, and a tendency to view websites with self-harm or suicidal content were at higher risk of engaging in SHB/suicidal behavior.32 This study did not use a specific definition for SHB or suicidal behavior.32

Continue to: Membership in certain youth...

 

 

Membership in certain youth subcultures (eg, emo or goth) has been evaluated as potential risk factors for depression and deliberate self-harm. Bowes et al33 found that for each unit increase in goth affiliation (not at all, not very much, somewhat, more than somewhat, very much), youth were 1.52 times more likely to engage in SHB; these researchers also reported a dose-response association between goth identification and future SHB. This study asked participants if they have ever tried to harm or hurt themselves in any manner, but did not distinguish between individuals who had harmed themselves with and without suicidal intent.33

Personality traits such as impulsiveness and loneliness have been linked to NSSI among adolescents.34,35 A recent study found that adolescents who met the proposed DSM-5 diagnostic criteria for NSSI scored higher on the Barratt Impulsiveness Scale, specifically in measures of:

  • motor impulsiveness (ie, acting without thinking)
  • attentional impulsiveness (ie, making decisions quickly)
  • impulsiveness due to lack of planning (ie, failure to plan for the future).34

This study also found that adolescents who identified as being lonely based on scores on the Brazilian Loneliness Scale were at a higher risk for NSSI.34

A recent systematic review (32 studies) and meta-analysis (9 studies) found that school absenteeism was associated with a risk of self-harm (pooled aOR 1.37, P = .01) and suicidal ideation (pooled aOR 1.20, P = .03).36 This study suggested that school absenteeism, an important marker of social exclusion, was associated with both SHB and suicidal ideation in young people.36 It defined SHB as any act of self-injury or self-poisoning, regardless of intent.36

Finally, family-related factors have been associated with an increased risk of NSSI. One study of 11,814 children age 9 and 10 revealed that high family conflict (OR 1.09; 95% CI, 1.05 to 1.14) and low parental monitoring (OR 0.95; 95% CI, 0.93 to 0.98) were associated with NSSI.37 A smaller, community-based study found that adolescents with NSSI reported significantly less maternal support and warmth than nonclinical controls, but a cause-and-effect relationship has not yet been determined.38 Parental history alone may influence adolescents’ risk of NSSI. A study that included nearly 76,000 youth found that adolescents with perceived parental alcohol problems had higher odds of self-injury, suicidal ideation, and suicide attempts.39 Adolescents exposed to maternal or paternal adversities were also at a higher risk of self-harm (hazard ratio 1.5 to 5.4 among males, 1.7 to 3.9 among females).40

Continue to: NSSI risk factors for adults

 

 

NSSI risk factors for adults

Although data regarding the prevalence of NSSI in adults are lacking, available studies report a 12-month prevalence of 0.9%2 and a lifetime prevalence of 5.5% to 5.9%.43 There is a significant overlap in risk factors for NSSI in adolescent and adult populations, but there are also many important differences. The static and dynamic risk factors for NSSI in adults are described in Table 3.44-66 Table 444-66 summarizes the studies of NSSI in adults that we reviewed.

Risk factors for nonsuicidal self-injury in adults

Static risk factors

Research findings regarding the prevalence of NSSI based on gender are varied. For years, it has been believed that women are more likely to engage in NSSI than men. Recent meta-analyses that have examined this relationship closely found that the gender difference is larger for clinical samples compared to community samples and more pronounced in younger individuals.11

Nonsuicidal self-injury in adults: Select studies

As is the case with adolescents, there may be ethnic variations in rates of self-harm and NSSI among adults. A 2013 study by Chesin et al44 found that Asian and White young adults experience higher rates of NSSI than their Hispanic and Black counterparts. Evidence suggests that relative rates of self-harm for older South Asian adults are lower than in older White adults.15

Compared to heterosexual or cisgender individuals, members of sexual and gender minorities have a higher past-year and lifetime prevalence of NSSI.45 One study found that the weighted effect size between sexual orientation and NSSI had an OR of 3 (95% CI, 2.46 to 3.66), indicating a medium-to-large effect.46 Bisexual and transgender individuals appear to be at the highest risk for NSSI when compared to members of other sexual and gender minority groups.45 One review that included mostly cross-sectional studies found that individuals identifying as bisexual had up to 6 times the odds of engaging in NSSI when compared to those of other sexual orientations.47

Incarceration is a risk factor for NSSI. The rates of NSSI in criminal justice settings are higher (up to 61%) than in the general adult population (approximately 4%).48 Recent research found that NSSI serves similar functions in correctional and non-correctional settings, primarily to regulate emotions.48 However, there is also evidence of higher rates of NSSI being motivated by an attempt to influence the environment (ie, engaging in NSSI in order to be transferred to another prison unit) compared to NSSI in community settings.48

Continue to: Though less robust than data...

 

 

Though less robust than data published regarding adolescents, the role of biological processes in adults engaging in NSSI has also been studied. A 2021 study by Störkel et al49 found that levels of salivary beta-endorphins were significantly lower in adults immediately before engaging in NSSI compared to after NSSI. Furthermore, adults who engage in NSSI have lower levels of met-enkephalin (P < .01), an opioid growth factor, compared to adults who have never engaged in NSSI.22

Dynamic risk factors

Individuals who engage in NSSI often report substance use, but there is little data on whether substance use is an independent risk factor for NSSI. Although limited, recent evidence suggests illicit substance use in both adolescents41 and adults50 increases risk for NSSI. Richardson et al50 found that the use of barbiturates, opiates, and sedatives significantly increased the frequency of NSSI, whereas use of marijuana, phencyclidine, and medications used to treat anxiety significantly increased the severity of NSSI. A smaller study conducted in South Africa found that individuals who engage in substance use and NSSI were more likely to be male (P < .001).51

Eating disorders and NSSI are highly comorbid.52 The lifetime prevalence of NSSI among individuals with eating disorders ranges from 20.6%to 37.1%.52,53 Results are inconsistent regarding which eating disorders (if any) are greater risk factors for NSSI. One study found that the prevalence of NSSI in patients with bulimia nervosa was 32.7% (95% CI, 26.9% to 39.1%) vs 21.8% in patients with anorexia nervosa (95% CI, 18.5% to 25.6%).54 Another study found that individuals with binge eating/purging–type eating disorders reported engaging in NSSI more frequently than those with other types of eating disorders.55 Among patients with eating disorders who reported NSSI, risk factors included younger age of onset, more negative self-evaluation, more impulsive behavior, concomitant substance use, history of suicide attempts, childhood abuse, and peer aggression.53,55 Body image dissatisfaction and self-criticism, even in individuals not formally diagnosed with an eating disorder, are small but significant predictors of NSSI.56,57

Mood disorders have also been linked to NSSI.58,59 Anxiety disorders (including generalized anxiety disorder, social phobia, panic disorder, and agoraphobia) as well as anxiety-related disorders such as obsessive-compulsive disorder have been significantly associated with NSSI (P < .001), but this relationship decreased in strength when mood instability was removed as a confounder.58 Among patients with anxiety and anxiety-related disorders, panic disorder and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) have shown the strongest association with NSSI, with pooled aORs of 2.67 and 2.06, respectively.59

Recent studies have examined the association of other mental health disorders and symptoms with NSSI, including psychosis60 and dissociative symptoms.61 One study found that paranoia, thought control, and auditory hallucinations were significantly associated with NSSI60; however, after controlling for concomitant BPD, only paranoia was significantly associated with NSSI.60 Individuals diagnosed with dissociative disorders were more likely than patients without such disorders to endorse NSSI and suicide attempts.61

Continue to: Emotional dysregulation...

 

 

Emotional dysregulation (EDR)—defined as difficulty understanding, recognizing, and managing one’s emotions—has been researched extensively in relation to NSSI.62 A recent review that included studies of both adolescents and adults reported a significant association between EDR and NSSI, with an OR of 2.40 (95% CI, 2.01 to 2.86).62 A larger effect size was observed between EDR and lifetime NSSI (OR 3.21; 95% CI, 2.63 to 3.91) compared to past-year NSSI (OR 2.32; 95% CI, 1.84 to 2.92).62 Patient age, sex, and sample type (clinical vs community) were not significant moderators of strength between the reported associations.62

Studies examining intimate partner violence (IPV) and NSSI have found that young adults who engage in IPV (both as victims and as perpetrators) are more likely to report NSSI.63-65 Researchers have proposed that anxiety over abandonment may explain this relationship.64 A recent study found that individuals with bidirectional IPV (ie, both victimization and perpetration) engaged in NSSI at a higher prevalence than those engaging in unidirectional IPV or no IPV.65 This suggests that relationship violence in general (rather than just being a victim of IPV) may be a risk factor for NSSI.65

Finally, studies suggest that adolescents and adults who have sleep problems (insomnia, short sleep duration, long sleep onset latency, waking after sleep onset, and poor quality sleep) are more likely to report self-harm or NSSI than those without sleep problems.42,66 In adults, this relationship is partially mediated by depressive symptoms, EDR, and PTSD.66 In adolescents, depressive symptoms are a mediator for this relationship.42

Bottom Line

Nonsuicidal self-injury (NSSI) is a significant health concern due to its association with suicide attempts. Although there are similarities in NSSI risk factors between adolescents and adults, there are also important differences. Understanding these differences is necessary to develop appropriate treatment plans.

Related Resources

  • American Foundation for Suicide Prevention. https://afsp.org/
  • Cipriano A, Cella S, Cotrufo P. Nonsuicidal self-injury: a systematic review. Front Psych. 2017;8:1946. doi:10.3389/ fpsyg.2017.01946
  • Gold LH, Frierson RL, eds. Textbook of Suicide Risk Assessment and Management. 3rd ed. American Psychiatric Association Publishing; 2020.

Nonsuicidal self-injury (NSSI) is the direct and deliberate destruction of body tissue without intent to die.1 Common forms of NSSI include cutting, burning, scraping/scratching skin, biting, hitting, and interfering with wound healing.2 Functional theories suggest that NSSI temporarily alleviates overwhelming negative emotions and can produce feelings of relief, resulting in a reinforcing effect.3

NSSI has been shown to be a risk factor for future suicide attempts.4 A 2018 study found that NSSI is associated with an increased risk of subsequent suicidal ideation (odds ratio [OR] 2.8), suicide plan (OR 3.0), and suicide attempt (OR 5.5).5 NSSI is also associated with individuals who had suicidal ideation and formed a suicide plan, and individuals who had a suicide plan and attempted suicide (ORs 1.7 to 2.1).5 Another study found that 70% of adolescents who engage in NSSI have attempted suicide during their lifetime, and 55% have multiple attempts.6

Given the overlap between suicide attempts and NSSI, performing a thorough suicide risk assessment (which is beyond the scope of this article) is crucial. This article describes the static and dynamic risk factors for NSSI in adolescents and adults, which can help us perform a suicide risk assessment and allow us to formulate an appropriate treatment plan that includes safety-based interventions.

Risk factors for nonsuicidal self-injury in adolescents

NSSI risk factors for adolescents

From developing sexual identity and undergoing puberty to achieving increased independence from their parents and developing a sense of autonomy, adolescents undergo many biological, psychological, and social changes before reaching adulthood.7 Data suggest that NSSI often begins in adolescence, with a typical onset at age 13 or 14.3 Community studies show that one-third to one-half of adolescents in the United States have engaged in NSSI.8,9 Previously, NSSI during adolescence was associated with 3 major diagnostic categories: eating disorders, developmental disabilities, and borderline personality disorder (BPD).10 However, recent data suggest that NSSI is also common outside of these categories. Here we describe static and dynamic risk factors for NSSI in adolescents (Table 111-42). Table 211-42 summarizes the studies of NSSI in adolescents that we reviewed.

Nonsuicidal self-injury in adolescents: Select studies

Static risk factors

Female adolescents and adults engage in NSSI at higher rates than males. The difference is larger in clinical populations compared to the general population.11

A large portion of research about NSSI has been conducted in studies in which the majority of participants were White.12 Most studies report a higher prevalence of NSSI among non-Hispanic White youth,13 but some suggest other ethnic groups may also experience high rates of self-harm and NSSI.13-15 Several studies have demonstrated high rates of self-harm among South Asian adult females compared with White adult females, but this difference may be less pronounced in adolescents.14 One study in the United Kingdom found that White females age 10 to 14 had higher rates of self-harm compared to South Asian females,14 while another found that risk and rates of self-harm in young South Asian people varied by city and country of origin.15 Young Black females15 and young Black males13 also may be at an increased risk of self-harm. One review found that Black females were more likely to self-harm than Asian or White groups.15

Several studies suggest that sexual minority adolescents (SMA) (eg, lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer) are at greater risk for NSSI than heterosexual adolescents.16 SMA have been shown to engage in a significantly greater frequency of NSSI and more types of NSSI than heterosexual adolescents.16 Furthermore, on the Inventory of Statements about Self-Injury, SMA self-reported using NSSI for intrapersonal functions (eg, for affect regulation, antisuicide, self-punishment) significantly greater than their heterosexual peers; however, there were no significant differences between the 2 groups on interpersonal functions (eg, autonomy, interpersonal boundaries, peer bonding, sensation-seeking).16

Continue to: Transgender and gender nonconfirming...

 

 

Transgender and gender nonconfirming (GNC) youth are at a particularly high risk for NSSI; 30% to 45.5% of transgender adolescents report self-injury.17 Factors shown to distinguish transgender/GNC youth who engage in NSSI from those who do not include having a mental health problem, depression, running away from home, substance use, lower self-esteem/greater self-criticism, experiencing transphobia victimization, and having more interpersonal problems.18,19 Among transgender/GNC youth, those whose biological sex is female are more likely to report NSSI than those whose biological sex is male (ie, transgendered adolescent males are more likely to report NSSI than transgendered adolescent females).18,19

Most forms of childhood maltreatment have been associated with NSSI. In a recently published review, Liu et al20 found that childhood maltreatment (including sexual abuse, physical abuse, emotional abuse, and physical neglect) was associated with an increased risk for NSSI. However, conflicting evidence suggests that when confounders are removed, only childhood emotional abuse was directly associated with NSSI.21 Current evidence is modest for childhood emotional neglect as a risk factor for NSSI.20

Increasing research is investigating the biological processes that may be implicated in NSSI. Some studies suggest that endogenous opioids,22 monoamine neurotransmitters,22 and the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis23 may play a role in NSSI. Compared to healthy controls, adolescents engaging in NSSI have been shown to have lower pain intensity (P = .036), higher pain thresholds (P = .040), and lower beta-endorphins (endogenous opioid hormones involved in mediating stress and pain) (P = .002).24 There may be alterations in the HPA axis among adolescents who engage in NSSI, more specifically stronger cortisol awakening responses.23 Both functional and standard MRI have been used to study the neurobiology of NSSI. One study demonstrated differences in functional connectivity between brain areas linked to neuroregulation of emotions in adolescents who engage in NSSI,25 while another found volume reduction in the insula of these adolescents, which suggests a possible neurobiological reason for impulsivity and the increased risk of suicidal behavior.26

Dynamic risk factors

Research has repeatedly shown bullying is a risk factor for NSSI.27 One study found that younger children who were victimized reported significantly more NSSI than older children.28 New data suggest that perpetrators of bullying are also at risk for deliberate self-harm behavior (SHB), which this study defined as a behavior that is intended to cause self-harm but without suicidal intent and having a nonfatal outcome.29 Victims of cyberbullying also are at a greater risk for self-harm, suicidal behaviors, and suicide attempt.30 To a lesser extent, cyberbullying perpetrators are at greater risk for suicidal behaviors and suicidal ideation.30 Bullying is a risk factor for NSSI not only in adolescence, but also in adulthood. Lereya et al31 found that victims of bullying in childhood and early adolescence were more likely to have mental health problems (including anxiety and depression) and more likely to engage in SHB—which this study defined as hurting oneself on purpose in any way—as adults.

The effects of internet use on adolescents’ mental health also has been investigated. A recent review that explored the relationship between all types of internet use (general use, internet addiction, social media, self-harm websites, forums, etc) and SHB/suicidal behavior found that young people with internet addiction, high levels of internet use, and a tendency to view websites with self-harm or suicidal content were at higher risk of engaging in SHB/suicidal behavior.32 This study did not use a specific definition for SHB or suicidal behavior.32

Continue to: Membership in certain youth...

 

 

Membership in certain youth subcultures (eg, emo or goth) has been evaluated as potential risk factors for depression and deliberate self-harm. Bowes et al33 found that for each unit increase in goth affiliation (not at all, not very much, somewhat, more than somewhat, very much), youth were 1.52 times more likely to engage in SHB; these researchers also reported a dose-response association between goth identification and future SHB. This study asked participants if they have ever tried to harm or hurt themselves in any manner, but did not distinguish between individuals who had harmed themselves with and without suicidal intent.33

Personality traits such as impulsiveness and loneliness have been linked to NSSI among adolescents.34,35 A recent study found that adolescents who met the proposed DSM-5 diagnostic criteria for NSSI scored higher on the Barratt Impulsiveness Scale, specifically in measures of:

  • motor impulsiveness (ie, acting without thinking)
  • attentional impulsiveness (ie, making decisions quickly)
  • impulsiveness due to lack of planning (ie, failure to plan for the future).34

This study also found that adolescents who identified as being lonely based on scores on the Brazilian Loneliness Scale were at a higher risk for NSSI.34

A recent systematic review (32 studies) and meta-analysis (9 studies) found that school absenteeism was associated with a risk of self-harm (pooled aOR 1.37, P = .01) and suicidal ideation (pooled aOR 1.20, P = .03).36 This study suggested that school absenteeism, an important marker of social exclusion, was associated with both SHB and suicidal ideation in young people.36 It defined SHB as any act of self-injury or self-poisoning, regardless of intent.36

Finally, family-related factors have been associated with an increased risk of NSSI. One study of 11,814 children age 9 and 10 revealed that high family conflict (OR 1.09; 95% CI, 1.05 to 1.14) and low parental monitoring (OR 0.95; 95% CI, 0.93 to 0.98) were associated with NSSI.37 A smaller, community-based study found that adolescents with NSSI reported significantly less maternal support and warmth than nonclinical controls, but a cause-and-effect relationship has not yet been determined.38 Parental history alone may influence adolescents’ risk of NSSI. A study that included nearly 76,000 youth found that adolescents with perceived parental alcohol problems had higher odds of self-injury, suicidal ideation, and suicide attempts.39 Adolescents exposed to maternal or paternal adversities were also at a higher risk of self-harm (hazard ratio 1.5 to 5.4 among males, 1.7 to 3.9 among females).40

Continue to: NSSI risk factors for adults

 

 

NSSI risk factors for adults

Although data regarding the prevalence of NSSI in adults are lacking, available studies report a 12-month prevalence of 0.9%2 and a lifetime prevalence of 5.5% to 5.9%.43 There is a significant overlap in risk factors for NSSI in adolescent and adult populations, but there are also many important differences. The static and dynamic risk factors for NSSI in adults are described in Table 3.44-66 Table 444-66 summarizes the studies of NSSI in adults that we reviewed.

Risk factors for nonsuicidal self-injury in adults

Static risk factors

Research findings regarding the prevalence of NSSI based on gender are varied. For years, it has been believed that women are more likely to engage in NSSI than men. Recent meta-analyses that have examined this relationship closely found that the gender difference is larger for clinical samples compared to community samples and more pronounced in younger individuals.11

Nonsuicidal self-injury in adults: Select studies

As is the case with adolescents, there may be ethnic variations in rates of self-harm and NSSI among adults. A 2013 study by Chesin et al44 found that Asian and White young adults experience higher rates of NSSI than their Hispanic and Black counterparts. Evidence suggests that relative rates of self-harm for older South Asian adults are lower than in older White adults.15

Compared to heterosexual or cisgender individuals, members of sexual and gender minorities have a higher past-year and lifetime prevalence of NSSI.45 One study found that the weighted effect size between sexual orientation and NSSI had an OR of 3 (95% CI, 2.46 to 3.66), indicating a medium-to-large effect.46 Bisexual and transgender individuals appear to be at the highest risk for NSSI when compared to members of other sexual and gender minority groups.45 One review that included mostly cross-sectional studies found that individuals identifying as bisexual had up to 6 times the odds of engaging in NSSI when compared to those of other sexual orientations.47

Incarceration is a risk factor for NSSI. The rates of NSSI in criminal justice settings are higher (up to 61%) than in the general adult population (approximately 4%).48 Recent research found that NSSI serves similar functions in correctional and non-correctional settings, primarily to regulate emotions.48 However, there is also evidence of higher rates of NSSI being motivated by an attempt to influence the environment (ie, engaging in NSSI in order to be transferred to another prison unit) compared to NSSI in community settings.48

Continue to: Though less robust than data...

 

 

Though less robust than data published regarding adolescents, the role of biological processes in adults engaging in NSSI has also been studied. A 2021 study by Störkel et al49 found that levels of salivary beta-endorphins were significantly lower in adults immediately before engaging in NSSI compared to after NSSI. Furthermore, adults who engage in NSSI have lower levels of met-enkephalin (P < .01), an opioid growth factor, compared to adults who have never engaged in NSSI.22

Dynamic risk factors

Individuals who engage in NSSI often report substance use, but there is little data on whether substance use is an independent risk factor for NSSI. Although limited, recent evidence suggests illicit substance use in both adolescents41 and adults50 increases risk for NSSI. Richardson et al50 found that the use of barbiturates, opiates, and sedatives significantly increased the frequency of NSSI, whereas use of marijuana, phencyclidine, and medications used to treat anxiety significantly increased the severity of NSSI. A smaller study conducted in South Africa found that individuals who engage in substance use and NSSI were more likely to be male (P < .001).51

Eating disorders and NSSI are highly comorbid.52 The lifetime prevalence of NSSI among individuals with eating disorders ranges from 20.6%to 37.1%.52,53 Results are inconsistent regarding which eating disorders (if any) are greater risk factors for NSSI. One study found that the prevalence of NSSI in patients with bulimia nervosa was 32.7% (95% CI, 26.9% to 39.1%) vs 21.8% in patients with anorexia nervosa (95% CI, 18.5% to 25.6%).54 Another study found that individuals with binge eating/purging–type eating disorders reported engaging in NSSI more frequently than those with other types of eating disorders.55 Among patients with eating disorders who reported NSSI, risk factors included younger age of onset, more negative self-evaluation, more impulsive behavior, concomitant substance use, history of suicide attempts, childhood abuse, and peer aggression.53,55 Body image dissatisfaction and self-criticism, even in individuals not formally diagnosed with an eating disorder, are small but significant predictors of NSSI.56,57

Mood disorders have also been linked to NSSI.58,59 Anxiety disorders (including generalized anxiety disorder, social phobia, panic disorder, and agoraphobia) as well as anxiety-related disorders such as obsessive-compulsive disorder have been significantly associated with NSSI (P < .001), but this relationship decreased in strength when mood instability was removed as a confounder.58 Among patients with anxiety and anxiety-related disorders, panic disorder and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) have shown the strongest association with NSSI, with pooled aORs of 2.67 and 2.06, respectively.59

Recent studies have examined the association of other mental health disorders and symptoms with NSSI, including psychosis60 and dissociative symptoms.61 One study found that paranoia, thought control, and auditory hallucinations were significantly associated with NSSI60; however, after controlling for concomitant BPD, only paranoia was significantly associated with NSSI.60 Individuals diagnosed with dissociative disorders were more likely than patients without such disorders to endorse NSSI and suicide attempts.61

Continue to: Emotional dysregulation...

 

 

Emotional dysregulation (EDR)—defined as difficulty understanding, recognizing, and managing one’s emotions—has been researched extensively in relation to NSSI.62 A recent review that included studies of both adolescents and adults reported a significant association between EDR and NSSI, with an OR of 2.40 (95% CI, 2.01 to 2.86).62 A larger effect size was observed between EDR and lifetime NSSI (OR 3.21; 95% CI, 2.63 to 3.91) compared to past-year NSSI (OR 2.32; 95% CI, 1.84 to 2.92).62 Patient age, sex, and sample type (clinical vs community) were not significant moderators of strength between the reported associations.62

Studies examining intimate partner violence (IPV) and NSSI have found that young adults who engage in IPV (both as victims and as perpetrators) are more likely to report NSSI.63-65 Researchers have proposed that anxiety over abandonment may explain this relationship.64 A recent study found that individuals with bidirectional IPV (ie, both victimization and perpetration) engaged in NSSI at a higher prevalence than those engaging in unidirectional IPV or no IPV.65 This suggests that relationship violence in general (rather than just being a victim of IPV) may be a risk factor for NSSI.65

Finally, studies suggest that adolescents and adults who have sleep problems (insomnia, short sleep duration, long sleep onset latency, waking after sleep onset, and poor quality sleep) are more likely to report self-harm or NSSI than those without sleep problems.42,66 In adults, this relationship is partially mediated by depressive symptoms, EDR, and PTSD.66 In adolescents, depressive symptoms are a mediator for this relationship.42

Bottom Line

Nonsuicidal self-injury (NSSI) is a significant health concern due to its association with suicide attempts. Although there are similarities in NSSI risk factors between adolescents and adults, there are also important differences. Understanding these differences is necessary to develop appropriate treatment plans.

Related Resources

  • American Foundation for Suicide Prevention. https://afsp.org/
  • Cipriano A, Cella S, Cotrufo P. Nonsuicidal self-injury: a systematic review. Front Psych. 2017;8:1946. doi:10.3389/ fpsyg.2017.01946
  • Gold LH, Frierson RL, eds. Textbook of Suicide Risk Assessment and Management. 3rd ed. American Psychiatric Association Publishing; 2020.
References

1. Nock MK. Self-injury. Annu Rev Clin Psychol. 2010;6:339-363.
2. Klonsky ED. Non-suicidal self-injury in United States adults: prevalence, sociodemographics, topography and functions. Psychol Med. 2011;41(9):1981-1986.
3. Klonsky ED. Nonsuicidal self-injury: what we know, and what we need to know. Can J Psychiatry. 2014;59(11):565-568.
4. Wilkinson P, Kelvin R, Roberts C, et al. Clinical and psychosocial predictors of suicide attempts and nonsuicidal self-injury in the Adolescent Depression Antidepressants and Psychotherapy Trial (ADAPT). Am J Psychiatry. 2011;168(5):495-501.
5. Kiekens G, Hasking P, Boyes M, et al. The associations between non-suicidal self-injury and first onset suicidal thoughts and behaviors. J Affect Disord. 2018;239:171-179.
6. Nock MK, Joiner TE, Gordon KH, et al. Non-suicidal self-injury among adolescents: diagnostic correlates and relation to suicide attempts. Psychiatry Res. 2006;144(1):65-72.
7. Christie D, Viner R. Adolescent development. BMJ. 2005;330(7486):301-304.
8. Yates TM, Tracy AJ, Luthar SS. Nonsuicidal self-injury among “privileged” youths: longitudinal and cross-sectional approaches to developmental process. J Consult Clin Psychol. 2008;76(1):52-62.
9. Lloyd-Richardson EE, Perrine N, Dierker L, et al. Characteristics and functions of non-suicidal self-injury in a community sample of adolescents. Psychol Med. 2007;37(8):1183-1192.
10. Peterson J, Freedenthal S, Sheldon C, et al. Nonsuicidal self injury in adolescents. Psychiatry(Edgmont). 2008;5(11):20-26.
11. Bresin K, Schoenleber M. Gender differences in the prevalence of nonsuicidal self-injury: a meta-analysis. Clin Psychol Rev. 2015;38:55-64.
12. Gholamrezaei M, Stefano JD, Heath NL. Nonsuicidal self-injury across cultures and ethnic and racial minorities: a review. Int J Psychol. 2015;52(4):316-326.
13. Rojas-Velasquez DA, Pluhar EI, Burns PA, et al. Nonsuicidal self-injury among African American and Hispanic adolescents and young adults: a systematic review. Prev Sci. 2021;22:367-377.
14. Bhui K, McKenzie K, Rasul F. Rates, risk factors & methods of self harm among minority ethnic groups in the UK: a systematic review. BMC Public Health. 2007;7:336.
15. Cooper J, Murphy E, Webb R, et al. Ethnic differences in self-harm, rates, characteristics and service provision: three-city cohort study. Br J Psychiatry. 2010;197(3):212-218.
16. Peters JR, Mereish EH, Krek MA, et al. Sexual orientation differences in non-suicidal self-injury, suicidality, and psychosocial factors among an inpatient psychiatric sample of adolescents. Psychiatry Res. 2020;284:112664.
17. Connolly MD, Zervos MJ, Barone 2nd CJ, et al. The mental health of transgender youth: advances in understanding. J Adolesc Health. 2016;59(5):489-495.
18. Taliaferro LA, McMorris BJ, Rider GN, et al. Risk and protective factors for self-harm in a population-based sample of transgender youth. Archives Suicide Res. 2019;23(2):203-221.
19. Arcelus J, Claes L, Witcomb GL, et al. Risk factors for non-suicidal self-injury among trans youth. J Sex Med. 2016;13(3):402-412.
20. Liu RT, Scopelliti KM, Pittman SK, et al. Childhood maltreatment and non-suicidal self-injury: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet Psychiatry. 2018;5(1):51-64.
21. Thomassin K, Shaffer A, Madden A, et al. Specificity of childhood maltreatment and emotion deficit in nonsuicidal self-injury in an inpatient sample of youth. Psychiatry Res. 2016;244:103-108.
22. Stanley B, Sher L, Wilson S, et al. Non-suicidal self-injurious behavior, endogenous opioids and monoamine neurotransmitters. J Affect Disord. 2010;124(1-2):134-140.
23. Reichl C, Heyer A, Brunner R, et al. Hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis, childhood adversity and adolescent nonsuicidal self-injury. Psychoneuroendocrinology. 2016;74:203-211.
24. van der Venne P, Balint A, Drews E, et al. Pain sensitivity and plasma beta-endorphin in adolescent non-suicidal self-injury. J Affect Disord. 2021;278:199-209.
25. Osuch E, Ford K, Wrath A, et al. Functional MRI of pain application in youth who engaged in repetitive non-suicidal self-injury vs. psychiatric controls. Psychiatry Res. 2014;223(2):104-112.
26. Ando A, Reichl C, Scheu F, et al. Regional grey matter volume reduction in adolescents engaging in non-suicidal self-injury. Psychiatry Res Neuroimaging. 2018;280:48-55.
27. Karanikola MNK, Lyberg A, Holm A-L, et al. The association between deliberate self-harm and school bullying victimization and the mediating effect of depressive symptoms and self-stigma: a systematic review. BioMed Res Int. 2018;4745791. doi: 10.1155/2018/4745791
28. van Geel M, Goemans A, Vedder P. A meta-analysis on the relation between peer victimization and adolescent non-suicidal self-injury. Psychiatry Res. 2015;230(2):364-368.
29. Heerde JA, Hemphill SA. Are bullying perpetration and victimization associated with adolescent deliberate self-harm? A meta-analysis. Arch Suicide Res. 2019;23(3):353-381.
30. John A, Glendenning AC, Marchant A, et al. Self-harm, suicidal behaviours, and cyberbullying in children and young people: systematic review. J Med Internet Res. 2018;20(4):e129. doi: 10.2196/jmir.9044
31. Lereya ST, Copeland WE, Costello EJ, et al. Adult mental health consequences of peer bullying and maltreatment in childhood: two cohorts in two countries. Lancet Psychiatry. 2015;2(6):524-531.
32. Marchant A, Hawton K, Stewart A, et al. A systematic review of the relationship between internet use, self-harm and suicidal behaviour in young people: the good, the bad and the unknown. PLoS One. 2017;12(8):e0181722. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0181722
33. Bowes L, Carnegie R, Pearson R, et al. Risk of depression and self-harm in teenagers identifying with goth subculture: a longitudinal cohort study. Lancet Psychiatry. 2015;2(9):793-800.
34. Costa RPO, Peixoto ALRP, Lucas CCA, et al. Profile of non-suicidal self-injury in adolescents: interface with impulsiveness and loneliness. J Pediatr (Rio J). 2021;97(2):184-190.
35. McHugh CM, Lee RSC, Hermens DF, et al. Impulsivity in the self-harm and suicidal behavior of young people: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Psychiatr Res. 2019;116:51-60.
36. Epstein S, Roberts E, Sedgwick R, et al. School absenteeism as a risk factor for self-harm and suicidal ideation in children and adolescents: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2020;29(9):1175-1194.
37. DeVille DC, Whalen D, Breslin FJ, et al. Prevalence and family-related factors associated with suicidal ideation, suicide attempts, and self-injury in children aged 9 to 10 years. JAMA Netw Open. 2020;3(2):e1920956. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2019.20956
38. Tschan T, Schmid M, In-Albon T. Parenting behavior in families of female adolescents with nonsuicidal self-injury in comparison to a clinical and a nonclinical control group. Child Adolesc Psychiatry Ment Health. 2015;9:17.
39. Pisinger V, Hawton K, Tolstrup JS. Self-injury and suicide behavior among young people with perceived parental alcohol problems in Denmark: a school-based survey. Eur Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2018;27(2):201-208.
40. Pitkänen J, Remes H, Aaltonen M, et al. Experience of mater­nal and paternal adversities in childhood as determinants of self-harm in adolescence and young adulthood. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2019;73(11):1040-1046.
41. Monto MA, McRee N, Deryck FS. Nonsuicidal self-injury among a representative sample of US adolescents, 2015. Am J Public Health. 2018;108(8):1042-1048.
42. Hysing M, Sivertsen B, Stormark KM, et al. Sleep problems and self-harm in adolescence. Br J Psychiatry. 2015;207(4):306-312.
43. Swannell SV, Martin GE, Page A, et al. Prevalence of nonsuicidal self-injury in nonclinical samples: systematic review, meta-analysis and meta-regression. Suicide Life Threat Behav. 2014;44(3):273-303.
44. Chesin M, Moster A, Jeglic E. Non-suicidal self-injury among ethnically and racially diverse emerging adults: do factors unique to the minority experience matter? Current Psychology. 2013;32:318-328.
45. Liu RT, Sheehan AE, Walsh RFL, et al. Prevalence and correlates of non-suicidal self-injury among lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender individuals: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Psychol Rev. 2019;74:101-783. doi:10.1016/j.cpr.2019.101783
46. Batejan KL, Jarvi SM, Swenson LP. Sexual orientation and non-suicidal self-injury: a meta-analytic review. Arch Suicide Res. 2015;19(2):131-150.
47. Dunlop BJ, Hartley S, Oladokun O, et al. Bisexuality and non-suicidal self-injury (NSSI): a narrative synthesis of associated variables and a meta-analysis of risk. J Affect Disord. 2020;276:1159-1172.
48. Dixon-Gordon K, Harrison N, Roesch R. Non-suicidal self-injury within offender populations: a systematic review. Int J Forensic Ment Health. 2012;11(1):33-50.
49. Störkel LM, Karabatsiakis A, Hepp K, et al. Salivary beta-endorphin in nonsuicidal self-injury: an ambulatory assessment study. Neuropsychopharmacology. 2021;46(7):1357-1363.
50. Richardson E, DePue MK, Therriault DJ, et al. The influence of substance use on engagement in non-suicidal self-injury (NSI) in adults. Subst Use Misuse. 2020;55(1):89-94.
51. Breet E, Bantjes J, Lewis I. Chronic substance use and self-harm in a primary health care setting. Afr J Prim Health Care Fam Med. 2018;10(1):e1-e9. doi: 10.4102/phcfm.v10i1.1544
52. Pérez S, Marco JH, Cañabate M. Non-suicidal self-injury in patients with eating disorders: prevalence, forms, functions, and body image correlates. Compr Psychiatry. 2018;84:32-38.
53. Islam MA, Steiger H, Jimenez-Murcia S, et al. Non-suicidal self-injury in different eating disorder types: relevance of personality traits and gender. Eur Eat Disord Rev. 2015;23(6):553-560.
54. Cucchi A, Ryan D, Konstantakopoulos G, et al. Lifetime prevalence of non-suicidal self-injury in patients with eating disorders: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Psychol Med. 2016;46(7):1345-1358.
55. Vieira AI, Machado BC, Machado PPP, et al. Putative risk factors for non-suicidal self-injury in eating disorders. Eur Eat Disord Rev. 2017;25(6):544-550.
56. Black EB, Garratt M, Beccaria G, et al. Body image as a predictor of nonsuicidal self-injury in women: a longitudinal study. Compr Psychiatry. 2019;88:83-89.
57. Zelkowitz RL, Cole DA. Self-criticism as a transdiagnostic process in nonsuicidal self-injury and disordered eating: systematic review and meta-analysis. Suicide Life Threat Behav. 2019;49(1):310-327.
58. Peters EM, Bowen R, Balbuena L. Mood instability contributes to impulsivity, non-suicidal self-injury, and binge eating/purging in people with anxiety disorders. Psychol Psychother. 2019;92(3):422-438.
59. Bentley KH, Cassiello-Robbins CF, Vittorio L, et al. The association between nonsuicidal self-injury and the emotional disorders: a meta-analytic review. Clin Psychol Rev. 2015;37:72-88.
60. Koyanagi A, Stickley A, Haro JM. Psychotic-like experiences and nonsuicidal self-injury in England: results from a national survey [corrected]. PLoS One. 2015;10(12):e0145533. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0145533
61. Calati R, Bensassi I, Courtet P. The link between dissociation and both suicide attempts and non-suicidal self-injury: meta-analyses. Psychiatry Res. 2017;251:103-114.
62. Wolff JC, Thompson E, Thomas SA, et al. Emotion dysregulation and non-suicidal self-injury: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Psychiatry. 2019;59:25-36.
63. Vaughn MG, Salas-Wright CP, DeLisi M, et al. Deliberate self-harm and the nexus of violence, victimization, and mental health problems in the United States. Psychiatry Res. 2015;225(3):588-595.
64. Levesque C, Lafontaine M-F, Bureau J-F, et al. The influence of romantic attachment and intimate partner violence on nonsuicidal self-injury in young adults. J Youth Adolesc. 2010;39(5):474-483.
65. Carranza AB, Wallis CRD, Jonnson MR, et al. Nonsuicidal self-injury and intimate partner violence: directionality of violence and motives for self-injury. J Interpers Violence. 2020;886260520922372. doi: 10.1177/0886260520922372
66. Khazaie H, Zakiei A, McCall WV, et al. Relationship between sleep problems and self-injury: a systematic review. Behav Sleep Med. 2020;1-16. doi: 10.1080/15402002.2020.1822360

References

1. Nock MK. Self-injury. Annu Rev Clin Psychol. 2010;6:339-363.
2. Klonsky ED. Non-suicidal self-injury in United States adults: prevalence, sociodemographics, topography and functions. Psychol Med. 2011;41(9):1981-1986.
3. Klonsky ED. Nonsuicidal self-injury: what we know, and what we need to know. Can J Psychiatry. 2014;59(11):565-568.
4. Wilkinson P, Kelvin R, Roberts C, et al. Clinical and psychosocial predictors of suicide attempts and nonsuicidal self-injury in the Adolescent Depression Antidepressants and Psychotherapy Trial (ADAPT). Am J Psychiatry. 2011;168(5):495-501.
5. Kiekens G, Hasking P, Boyes M, et al. The associations between non-suicidal self-injury and first onset suicidal thoughts and behaviors. J Affect Disord. 2018;239:171-179.
6. Nock MK, Joiner TE, Gordon KH, et al. Non-suicidal self-injury among adolescents: diagnostic correlates and relation to suicide attempts. Psychiatry Res. 2006;144(1):65-72.
7. Christie D, Viner R. Adolescent development. BMJ. 2005;330(7486):301-304.
8. Yates TM, Tracy AJ, Luthar SS. Nonsuicidal self-injury among “privileged” youths: longitudinal and cross-sectional approaches to developmental process. J Consult Clin Psychol. 2008;76(1):52-62.
9. Lloyd-Richardson EE, Perrine N, Dierker L, et al. Characteristics and functions of non-suicidal self-injury in a community sample of adolescents. Psychol Med. 2007;37(8):1183-1192.
10. Peterson J, Freedenthal S, Sheldon C, et al. Nonsuicidal self injury in adolescents. Psychiatry(Edgmont). 2008;5(11):20-26.
11. Bresin K, Schoenleber M. Gender differences in the prevalence of nonsuicidal self-injury: a meta-analysis. Clin Psychol Rev. 2015;38:55-64.
12. Gholamrezaei M, Stefano JD, Heath NL. Nonsuicidal self-injury across cultures and ethnic and racial minorities: a review. Int J Psychol. 2015;52(4):316-326.
13. Rojas-Velasquez DA, Pluhar EI, Burns PA, et al. Nonsuicidal self-injury among African American and Hispanic adolescents and young adults: a systematic review. Prev Sci. 2021;22:367-377.
14. Bhui K, McKenzie K, Rasul F. Rates, risk factors & methods of self harm among minority ethnic groups in the UK: a systematic review. BMC Public Health. 2007;7:336.
15. Cooper J, Murphy E, Webb R, et al. Ethnic differences in self-harm, rates, characteristics and service provision: three-city cohort study. Br J Psychiatry. 2010;197(3):212-218.
16. Peters JR, Mereish EH, Krek MA, et al. Sexual orientation differences in non-suicidal self-injury, suicidality, and psychosocial factors among an inpatient psychiatric sample of adolescents. Psychiatry Res. 2020;284:112664.
17. Connolly MD, Zervos MJ, Barone 2nd CJ, et al. The mental health of transgender youth: advances in understanding. J Adolesc Health. 2016;59(5):489-495.
18. Taliaferro LA, McMorris BJ, Rider GN, et al. Risk and protective factors for self-harm in a population-based sample of transgender youth. Archives Suicide Res. 2019;23(2):203-221.
19. Arcelus J, Claes L, Witcomb GL, et al. Risk factors for non-suicidal self-injury among trans youth. J Sex Med. 2016;13(3):402-412.
20. Liu RT, Scopelliti KM, Pittman SK, et al. Childhood maltreatment and non-suicidal self-injury: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet Psychiatry. 2018;5(1):51-64.
21. Thomassin K, Shaffer A, Madden A, et al. Specificity of childhood maltreatment and emotion deficit in nonsuicidal self-injury in an inpatient sample of youth. Psychiatry Res. 2016;244:103-108.
22. Stanley B, Sher L, Wilson S, et al. Non-suicidal self-injurious behavior, endogenous opioids and monoamine neurotransmitters. J Affect Disord. 2010;124(1-2):134-140.
23. Reichl C, Heyer A, Brunner R, et al. Hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis, childhood adversity and adolescent nonsuicidal self-injury. Psychoneuroendocrinology. 2016;74:203-211.
24. van der Venne P, Balint A, Drews E, et al. Pain sensitivity and plasma beta-endorphin in adolescent non-suicidal self-injury. J Affect Disord. 2021;278:199-209.
25. Osuch E, Ford K, Wrath A, et al. Functional MRI of pain application in youth who engaged in repetitive non-suicidal self-injury vs. psychiatric controls. Psychiatry Res. 2014;223(2):104-112.
26. Ando A, Reichl C, Scheu F, et al. Regional grey matter volume reduction in adolescents engaging in non-suicidal self-injury. Psychiatry Res Neuroimaging. 2018;280:48-55.
27. Karanikola MNK, Lyberg A, Holm A-L, et al. The association between deliberate self-harm and school bullying victimization and the mediating effect of depressive symptoms and self-stigma: a systematic review. BioMed Res Int. 2018;4745791. doi: 10.1155/2018/4745791
28. van Geel M, Goemans A, Vedder P. A meta-analysis on the relation between peer victimization and adolescent non-suicidal self-injury. Psychiatry Res. 2015;230(2):364-368.
29. Heerde JA, Hemphill SA. Are bullying perpetration and victimization associated with adolescent deliberate self-harm? A meta-analysis. Arch Suicide Res. 2019;23(3):353-381.
30. John A, Glendenning AC, Marchant A, et al. Self-harm, suicidal behaviours, and cyberbullying in children and young people: systematic review. J Med Internet Res. 2018;20(4):e129. doi: 10.2196/jmir.9044
31. Lereya ST, Copeland WE, Costello EJ, et al. Adult mental health consequences of peer bullying and maltreatment in childhood: two cohorts in two countries. Lancet Psychiatry. 2015;2(6):524-531.
32. Marchant A, Hawton K, Stewart A, et al. A systematic review of the relationship between internet use, self-harm and suicidal behaviour in young people: the good, the bad and the unknown. PLoS One. 2017;12(8):e0181722. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0181722
33. Bowes L, Carnegie R, Pearson R, et al. Risk of depression and self-harm in teenagers identifying with goth subculture: a longitudinal cohort study. Lancet Psychiatry. 2015;2(9):793-800.
34. Costa RPO, Peixoto ALRP, Lucas CCA, et al. Profile of non-suicidal self-injury in adolescents: interface with impulsiveness and loneliness. J Pediatr (Rio J). 2021;97(2):184-190.
35. McHugh CM, Lee RSC, Hermens DF, et al. Impulsivity in the self-harm and suicidal behavior of young people: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Psychiatr Res. 2019;116:51-60.
36. Epstein S, Roberts E, Sedgwick R, et al. School absenteeism as a risk factor for self-harm and suicidal ideation in children and adolescents: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2020;29(9):1175-1194.
37. DeVille DC, Whalen D, Breslin FJ, et al. Prevalence and family-related factors associated with suicidal ideation, suicide attempts, and self-injury in children aged 9 to 10 years. JAMA Netw Open. 2020;3(2):e1920956. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2019.20956
38. Tschan T, Schmid M, In-Albon T. Parenting behavior in families of female adolescents with nonsuicidal self-injury in comparison to a clinical and a nonclinical control group. Child Adolesc Psychiatry Ment Health. 2015;9:17.
39. Pisinger V, Hawton K, Tolstrup JS. Self-injury and suicide behavior among young people with perceived parental alcohol problems in Denmark: a school-based survey. Eur Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2018;27(2):201-208.
40. Pitkänen J, Remes H, Aaltonen M, et al. Experience of mater­nal and paternal adversities in childhood as determinants of self-harm in adolescence and young adulthood. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2019;73(11):1040-1046.
41. Monto MA, McRee N, Deryck FS. Nonsuicidal self-injury among a representative sample of US adolescents, 2015. Am J Public Health. 2018;108(8):1042-1048.
42. Hysing M, Sivertsen B, Stormark KM, et al. Sleep problems and self-harm in adolescence. Br J Psychiatry. 2015;207(4):306-312.
43. Swannell SV, Martin GE, Page A, et al. Prevalence of nonsuicidal self-injury in nonclinical samples: systematic review, meta-analysis and meta-regression. Suicide Life Threat Behav. 2014;44(3):273-303.
44. Chesin M, Moster A, Jeglic E. Non-suicidal self-injury among ethnically and racially diverse emerging adults: do factors unique to the minority experience matter? Current Psychology. 2013;32:318-328.
45. Liu RT, Sheehan AE, Walsh RFL, et al. Prevalence and correlates of non-suicidal self-injury among lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender individuals: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Psychol Rev. 2019;74:101-783. doi:10.1016/j.cpr.2019.101783
46. Batejan KL, Jarvi SM, Swenson LP. Sexual orientation and non-suicidal self-injury: a meta-analytic review. Arch Suicide Res. 2015;19(2):131-150.
47. Dunlop BJ, Hartley S, Oladokun O, et al. Bisexuality and non-suicidal self-injury (NSSI): a narrative synthesis of associated variables and a meta-analysis of risk. J Affect Disord. 2020;276:1159-1172.
48. Dixon-Gordon K, Harrison N, Roesch R. Non-suicidal self-injury within offender populations: a systematic review. Int J Forensic Ment Health. 2012;11(1):33-50.
49. Störkel LM, Karabatsiakis A, Hepp K, et al. Salivary beta-endorphin in nonsuicidal self-injury: an ambulatory assessment study. Neuropsychopharmacology. 2021;46(7):1357-1363.
50. Richardson E, DePue MK, Therriault DJ, et al. The influence of substance use on engagement in non-suicidal self-injury (NSI) in adults. Subst Use Misuse. 2020;55(1):89-94.
51. Breet E, Bantjes J, Lewis I. Chronic substance use and self-harm in a primary health care setting. Afr J Prim Health Care Fam Med. 2018;10(1):e1-e9. doi: 10.4102/phcfm.v10i1.1544
52. Pérez S, Marco JH, Cañabate M. Non-suicidal self-injury in patients with eating disorders: prevalence, forms, functions, and body image correlates. Compr Psychiatry. 2018;84:32-38.
53. Islam MA, Steiger H, Jimenez-Murcia S, et al. Non-suicidal self-injury in different eating disorder types: relevance of personality traits and gender. Eur Eat Disord Rev. 2015;23(6):553-560.
54. Cucchi A, Ryan D, Konstantakopoulos G, et al. Lifetime prevalence of non-suicidal self-injury in patients with eating disorders: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Psychol Med. 2016;46(7):1345-1358.
55. Vieira AI, Machado BC, Machado PPP, et al. Putative risk factors for non-suicidal self-injury in eating disorders. Eur Eat Disord Rev. 2017;25(6):544-550.
56. Black EB, Garratt M, Beccaria G, et al. Body image as a predictor of nonsuicidal self-injury in women: a longitudinal study. Compr Psychiatry. 2019;88:83-89.
57. Zelkowitz RL, Cole DA. Self-criticism as a transdiagnostic process in nonsuicidal self-injury and disordered eating: systematic review and meta-analysis. Suicide Life Threat Behav. 2019;49(1):310-327.
58. Peters EM, Bowen R, Balbuena L. Mood instability contributes to impulsivity, non-suicidal self-injury, and binge eating/purging in people with anxiety disorders. Psychol Psychother. 2019;92(3):422-438.
59. Bentley KH, Cassiello-Robbins CF, Vittorio L, et al. The association between nonsuicidal self-injury and the emotional disorders: a meta-analytic review. Clin Psychol Rev. 2015;37:72-88.
60. Koyanagi A, Stickley A, Haro JM. Psychotic-like experiences and nonsuicidal self-injury in England: results from a national survey [corrected]. PLoS One. 2015;10(12):e0145533. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0145533
61. Calati R, Bensassi I, Courtet P. The link between dissociation and both suicide attempts and non-suicidal self-injury: meta-analyses. Psychiatry Res. 2017;251:103-114.
62. Wolff JC, Thompson E, Thomas SA, et al. Emotion dysregulation and non-suicidal self-injury: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Psychiatry. 2019;59:25-36.
63. Vaughn MG, Salas-Wright CP, DeLisi M, et al. Deliberate self-harm and the nexus of violence, victimization, and mental health problems in the United States. Psychiatry Res. 2015;225(3):588-595.
64. Levesque C, Lafontaine M-F, Bureau J-F, et al. The influence of romantic attachment and intimate partner violence on nonsuicidal self-injury in young adults. J Youth Adolesc. 2010;39(5):474-483.
65. Carranza AB, Wallis CRD, Jonnson MR, et al. Nonsuicidal self-injury and intimate partner violence: directionality of violence and motives for self-injury. J Interpers Violence. 2020;886260520922372. doi: 10.1177/0886260520922372
66. Khazaie H, Zakiei A, McCall WV, et al. Relationship between sleep problems and self-injury: a systematic review. Behav Sleep Med. 2020;1-16. doi: 10.1080/15402002.2020.1822360

Issue
Current Psychiatry - 21(8)
Issue
Current Psychiatry - 21(8)
Page Number
15-25
Page Number
15-25
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline
Risk factors for nonsuicidal self-injury: A review of the evidence
Display Headline
Risk factors for nonsuicidal self-injury: A review of the evidence
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.
Conference Recap Checkbox
Not Conference Recap
Clinical Edge
Display the Slideshow in this Article
Medscape Article
Display survey writer
Reuters content
Disable Inline Native ads
WebMD Article
Article PDF Media

How to ‘cybersecure’ your practice

Article Type
Changed
Mon, 05/02/2022 - 00:15
Display Headline
How to ‘cybersecure’ your practice

The health care sector is not immune from cybersecurity attacks (malicious attempts to access or damage a computer or network system). Between October 2019 and October 2021, 857 data breaches were reported to the United States Department of Health and Human Services.1 The 3 main types of breaches reported were theft, hacking/IT incident, or unauthorized access/disclosure.1 Health care has become a common target due to the availability of valuable patient information (health, personal, and financial), the industry’s financial stability and resource capacity, and network susceptibility.2 The top 2 cybersecurity threats facing physician practices are:

  • ransomware attacks, in which an external party uses a type of malicious software (malware) that prevents you from accessing your computer files, systems, or networks, and demands you pay a ransom for their return.
  • employee-related threats, such as the theft or destruction of sensitive information by a disgruntled employee.3

The financial implications of health care–related cybersecurity threats coupled with exposure to potential litigation associated with breaches of confidentiality result in a need to “cybersecure” your practice.2 In this article, I outline steps to take to protect your practice against such threats. Although the recommendations I provide will increase your practice’s cybersecurity fortification, they are not exhaustive, and you may need to consult with an IT specialist to help protect your data and network.

Improve your network protection. A broadband internet connection is always operating, which makes it continuously susceptible to cybersecurity attacks. Install a firewall (a network security system that monitors and controls network traffic and permits or blocks traffic based on a defined set of rules) between your practice’s internal computer network and the internet.4 For maximum protection, enable all available firewall settings in your operating software.2 Prevent unauthorized access by ensuring that all network passwords are strong (ie, they include a combination of uppercase and lowercase letters, numbers, and symbols). Consider using different networks for online communication and for storing sensitive information.2 Create separate Wi-Fi networks for your practice and for your patients, and use unique passwords for each that are not easily guessed.4 If you or your employees use a virtual private network (VPN) to remotely access your practice’s network, ensure that all devices used to do so (cell phones, tablets, etc) are encrypted and secured with strong passwords.

Reduce employee-related threats. Not every employee in your practice will need to access to your patients’ clinical or financial data. Limiting employee access to sensitive clinical or financial data can reduce the risks of employee-related cybersecurity threats.3 In addition, restrict an employee’s ability to install software on computers and other devices that belong to your practice.2

Frequently incorporate cybersecurity training, such as teaching your employees about the risks of clicking on links and attachments in emails and how to identify phishing attacks (in which an individual sends a fraudulent communication that appears to come from a reputable source in order to trick the recipient into revealing financial information, system credentials, or other sensitive data).2,3 Use multifactor authentication to verify an employee’s login identity, and change passwords often. Reinforce these policies at staff meetings and educate new employees about this process.3 If you need to fire an employee, consider deploying cybersurveillance software to monitor the behavior of all employees before the employee is terminated.3 Once the employee has been terminated, change all logins and passwords.

References

1. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Office for Civil Rights. Breach portal: Notice to the Secretary of HHS breach of unsecured protected health information. Accessed December 26, 2021. https://ocrportal.hhs.gov/ocr/breach/breach_report.jsf
2. Umali G. How to safeguard your practice from cybersecurity threats. Psychiatric News. 2021;56(12):23.
3. Cryts A. Top two cybersecurity threats facing physician practices. Physicians Practice. March 13, 2020. Accessed December 26, 2021. https://www.physicianspractice.com/view/top-two-cybersecurity-threats-facing-physician-practices
4. American Medical Association. Protect your practice and patients from cybersecurity threats. 2017. Accessed December 26, 2021. https://www.ama-assn.org/sites/ama-assn.org/files/corp/media-browser/public/government/advocacy/network-security.pdf

Article PDF
Author and Disclosure Information

Dr. Joshi is Associate Professor of Clinical Psychiatry and Associate Director, Forensic Psychiatry Fellowship, Department of Neuropsychiatry and Behavioral Science, University of South Carolina School of Medicine, Columbia, South Carolina.

Disclosures
The author reports no financial relationships with any companies whose products are mentioned in this article, or with manufacturers of competing products.

Issue
Current Psychiatry - 21(5)
Publications
Topics
Page Number
12,19
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

Dr. Joshi is Associate Professor of Clinical Psychiatry and Associate Director, Forensic Psychiatry Fellowship, Department of Neuropsychiatry and Behavioral Science, University of South Carolina School of Medicine, Columbia, South Carolina.

Disclosures
The author reports no financial relationships with any companies whose products are mentioned in this article, or with manufacturers of competing products.

Author and Disclosure Information

Dr. Joshi is Associate Professor of Clinical Psychiatry and Associate Director, Forensic Psychiatry Fellowship, Department of Neuropsychiatry and Behavioral Science, University of South Carolina School of Medicine, Columbia, South Carolina.

Disclosures
The author reports no financial relationships with any companies whose products are mentioned in this article, or with manufacturers of competing products.

Article PDF
Article PDF

The health care sector is not immune from cybersecurity attacks (malicious attempts to access or damage a computer or network system). Between October 2019 and October 2021, 857 data breaches were reported to the United States Department of Health and Human Services.1 The 3 main types of breaches reported were theft, hacking/IT incident, or unauthorized access/disclosure.1 Health care has become a common target due to the availability of valuable patient information (health, personal, and financial), the industry’s financial stability and resource capacity, and network susceptibility.2 The top 2 cybersecurity threats facing physician practices are:

  • ransomware attacks, in which an external party uses a type of malicious software (malware) that prevents you from accessing your computer files, systems, or networks, and demands you pay a ransom for their return.
  • employee-related threats, such as the theft or destruction of sensitive information by a disgruntled employee.3

The financial implications of health care–related cybersecurity threats coupled with exposure to potential litigation associated with breaches of confidentiality result in a need to “cybersecure” your practice.2 In this article, I outline steps to take to protect your practice against such threats. Although the recommendations I provide will increase your practice’s cybersecurity fortification, they are not exhaustive, and you may need to consult with an IT specialist to help protect your data and network.

Improve your network protection. A broadband internet connection is always operating, which makes it continuously susceptible to cybersecurity attacks. Install a firewall (a network security system that monitors and controls network traffic and permits or blocks traffic based on a defined set of rules) between your practice’s internal computer network and the internet.4 For maximum protection, enable all available firewall settings in your operating software.2 Prevent unauthorized access by ensuring that all network passwords are strong (ie, they include a combination of uppercase and lowercase letters, numbers, and symbols). Consider using different networks for online communication and for storing sensitive information.2 Create separate Wi-Fi networks for your practice and for your patients, and use unique passwords for each that are not easily guessed.4 If you or your employees use a virtual private network (VPN) to remotely access your practice’s network, ensure that all devices used to do so (cell phones, tablets, etc) are encrypted and secured with strong passwords.

Reduce employee-related threats. Not every employee in your practice will need to access to your patients’ clinical or financial data. Limiting employee access to sensitive clinical or financial data can reduce the risks of employee-related cybersecurity threats.3 In addition, restrict an employee’s ability to install software on computers and other devices that belong to your practice.2

Frequently incorporate cybersecurity training, such as teaching your employees about the risks of clicking on links and attachments in emails and how to identify phishing attacks (in which an individual sends a fraudulent communication that appears to come from a reputable source in order to trick the recipient into revealing financial information, system credentials, or other sensitive data).2,3 Use multifactor authentication to verify an employee’s login identity, and change passwords often. Reinforce these policies at staff meetings and educate new employees about this process.3 If you need to fire an employee, consider deploying cybersurveillance software to monitor the behavior of all employees before the employee is terminated.3 Once the employee has been terminated, change all logins and passwords.

The health care sector is not immune from cybersecurity attacks (malicious attempts to access or damage a computer or network system). Between October 2019 and October 2021, 857 data breaches were reported to the United States Department of Health and Human Services.1 The 3 main types of breaches reported were theft, hacking/IT incident, or unauthorized access/disclosure.1 Health care has become a common target due to the availability of valuable patient information (health, personal, and financial), the industry’s financial stability and resource capacity, and network susceptibility.2 The top 2 cybersecurity threats facing physician practices are:

  • ransomware attacks, in which an external party uses a type of malicious software (malware) that prevents you from accessing your computer files, systems, or networks, and demands you pay a ransom for their return.
  • employee-related threats, such as the theft or destruction of sensitive information by a disgruntled employee.3

The financial implications of health care–related cybersecurity threats coupled with exposure to potential litigation associated with breaches of confidentiality result in a need to “cybersecure” your practice.2 In this article, I outline steps to take to protect your practice against such threats. Although the recommendations I provide will increase your practice’s cybersecurity fortification, they are not exhaustive, and you may need to consult with an IT specialist to help protect your data and network.

Improve your network protection. A broadband internet connection is always operating, which makes it continuously susceptible to cybersecurity attacks. Install a firewall (a network security system that monitors and controls network traffic and permits or blocks traffic based on a defined set of rules) between your practice’s internal computer network and the internet.4 For maximum protection, enable all available firewall settings in your operating software.2 Prevent unauthorized access by ensuring that all network passwords are strong (ie, they include a combination of uppercase and lowercase letters, numbers, and symbols). Consider using different networks for online communication and for storing sensitive information.2 Create separate Wi-Fi networks for your practice and for your patients, and use unique passwords for each that are not easily guessed.4 If you or your employees use a virtual private network (VPN) to remotely access your practice’s network, ensure that all devices used to do so (cell phones, tablets, etc) are encrypted and secured with strong passwords.

Reduce employee-related threats. Not every employee in your practice will need to access to your patients’ clinical or financial data. Limiting employee access to sensitive clinical or financial data can reduce the risks of employee-related cybersecurity threats.3 In addition, restrict an employee’s ability to install software on computers and other devices that belong to your practice.2

Frequently incorporate cybersecurity training, such as teaching your employees about the risks of clicking on links and attachments in emails and how to identify phishing attacks (in which an individual sends a fraudulent communication that appears to come from a reputable source in order to trick the recipient into revealing financial information, system credentials, or other sensitive data).2,3 Use multifactor authentication to verify an employee’s login identity, and change passwords often. Reinforce these policies at staff meetings and educate new employees about this process.3 If you need to fire an employee, consider deploying cybersurveillance software to monitor the behavior of all employees before the employee is terminated.3 Once the employee has been terminated, change all logins and passwords.

References

1. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Office for Civil Rights. Breach portal: Notice to the Secretary of HHS breach of unsecured protected health information. Accessed December 26, 2021. https://ocrportal.hhs.gov/ocr/breach/breach_report.jsf
2. Umali G. How to safeguard your practice from cybersecurity threats. Psychiatric News. 2021;56(12):23.
3. Cryts A. Top two cybersecurity threats facing physician practices. Physicians Practice. March 13, 2020. Accessed December 26, 2021. https://www.physicianspractice.com/view/top-two-cybersecurity-threats-facing-physician-practices
4. American Medical Association. Protect your practice and patients from cybersecurity threats. 2017. Accessed December 26, 2021. https://www.ama-assn.org/sites/ama-assn.org/files/corp/media-browser/public/government/advocacy/network-security.pdf

References

1. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Office for Civil Rights. Breach portal: Notice to the Secretary of HHS breach of unsecured protected health information. Accessed December 26, 2021. https://ocrportal.hhs.gov/ocr/breach/breach_report.jsf
2. Umali G. How to safeguard your practice from cybersecurity threats. Psychiatric News. 2021;56(12):23.
3. Cryts A. Top two cybersecurity threats facing physician practices. Physicians Practice. March 13, 2020. Accessed December 26, 2021. https://www.physicianspractice.com/view/top-two-cybersecurity-threats-facing-physician-practices
4. American Medical Association. Protect your practice and patients from cybersecurity threats. 2017. Accessed December 26, 2021. https://www.ama-assn.org/sites/ama-assn.org/files/corp/media-browser/public/government/advocacy/network-security.pdf

Issue
Current Psychiatry - 21(5)
Issue
Current Psychiatry - 21(5)
Page Number
12,19
Page Number
12,19
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline
How to ‘cybersecure’ your practice
Display Headline
How to ‘cybersecure’ your practice
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.
Conference Recap Checkbox
Not Conference Recap
Clinical Edge
Display the Slideshow in this Article
Medscape Article
Display survey writer
Reuters content
Disable Inline Native ads
WebMD Article
Article PDF Media

How to say ‘no’ to inappropriate patient requests

Article Type
Changed
Tue, 03/01/2022 - 09:03

Although we may want to say “yes” when our patients ask us for certain medications, work excuses, etc, often it is more appropriate to say “no” because the conditions do not support those requests. Saying no to a patient usually is not a comfortable experience, but we should not say yes to avoid hurting their feelings, damaging our rapport with them, or having them post potential negative reviews about us. For many of us, saying no is a skill that does not come naturally. For some, bluntly telling a patient no may work, but this approach is more likely to be ineffective. At the same time, saying no in an equivocal manner may weaken our patients’ confidence in us and could be displeasing for both our patients and us.1,2

We should say no in an “effective, professional manner that fosters good patient care and preserves the therapeutic relationship, while supporting physician well-being.”1 In this article, I provide practical tips for saying no to inappropriate patient requests in an emphatic manner so that we can feel more empowered and less uncomfortable.

Acknowledge and analyze your discomfort.

Before saying no, recognize that you are feeling uncomfortable with your patient’s inappropriate request. This uncomfortable feeling is a probable cue that there is likely no appropriate context for their request, ie, saying yes would be poor medical care, illegal, against policy, etc.1,3 In most cases, you should be able to identify the reason(s) your patient’s request feels inappropriate and uncomfortable.

Gather information and provide an explanation.

Ask your patient for more information about their request so you can determine if there are any underlying factors and if any additional information is needed.3 Once you decide to say no, explain why. Your explanation should be brief, because lengthy explanations might create room for debate (which could be exhausting and/or time-consuming), lead to giving in to their inappropriate request, and/or lead them to become more frustrated and misunderstood.1

Be empathetic, and re-establish rapport.

After declining a patient’s request, you may have to use empathy to re-establish rapport if it has been damaged. After being told no, your patient may feel frustrated or powerless. Acknowledge their feelings with statements such as “I know this is not want you wanted to hear” or “I can see you are irritated.”Accept your patient’s negative emotions, rather than minimizing them or trying to fix them.1,3

References

1. Kane M, Chambliss ML. Getting to no: how to respond to inappropriate patient requests. Fam Prac Manag. 2018;25(1):25-30.

2. Paterniti DA, Facher TL, Cipri CS, et al. Getting to “no”: strategies primary care physicians use to deny patient requests. Arch Intern Med. 2010;170(4):381-388.

3. Huben-Kearney A. Just say no to certain patient requests—and here’s how. Psychiatric  News. 2021;56(2):13.

Article PDF
Author and Disclosure Information

Kaustubh G. Joshi, MD

Dr. Joshi is Associate Professor of Clinical Psychiatry and Associate Director, Forensic Psychiatry Fellowship, Department of Neuropsychiatry and Behavioral Science, University of South Carolina School of Medicine, Columbia, South Carolina.

Disclosure

The author reports no financial relationships with any companies whose products are mentioned in this article, or with manufacturers of competing products.

Issue
Current Psychiatry - 21(3)
Publications
Topics
Page Number
52
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

Kaustubh G. Joshi, MD

Dr. Joshi is Associate Professor of Clinical Psychiatry and Associate Director, Forensic Psychiatry Fellowship, Department of Neuropsychiatry and Behavioral Science, University of South Carolina School of Medicine, Columbia, South Carolina.

Disclosure

The author reports no financial relationships with any companies whose products are mentioned in this article, or with manufacturers of competing products.

Author and Disclosure Information

Kaustubh G. Joshi, MD

Dr. Joshi is Associate Professor of Clinical Psychiatry and Associate Director, Forensic Psychiatry Fellowship, Department of Neuropsychiatry and Behavioral Science, University of South Carolina School of Medicine, Columbia, South Carolina.

Disclosure

The author reports no financial relationships with any companies whose products are mentioned in this article, or with manufacturers of competing products.

Article PDF
Article PDF

Although we may want to say “yes” when our patients ask us for certain medications, work excuses, etc, often it is more appropriate to say “no” because the conditions do not support those requests. Saying no to a patient usually is not a comfortable experience, but we should not say yes to avoid hurting their feelings, damaging our rapport with them, or having them post potential negative reviews about us. For many of us, saying no is a skill that does not come naturally. For some, bluntly telling a patient no may work, but this approach is more likely to be ineffective. At the same time, saying no in an equivocal manner may weaken our patients’ confidence in us and could be displeasing for both our patients and us.1,2

We should say no in an “effective, professional manner that fosters good patient care and preserves the therapeutic relationship, while supporting physician well-being.”1 In this article, I provide practical tips for saying no to inappropriate patient requests in an emphatic manner so that we can feel more empowered and less uncomfortable.

Acknowledge and analyze your discomfort.

Before saying no, recognize that you are feeling uncomfortable with your patient’s inappropriate request. This uncomfortable feeling is a probable cue that there is likely no appropriate context for their request, ie, saying yes would be poor medical care, illegal, against policy, etc.1,3 In most cases, you should be able to identify the reason(s) your patient’s request feels inappropriate and uncomfortable.

Gather information and provide an explanation.

Ask your patient for more information about their request so you can determine if there are any underlying factors and if any additional information is needed.3 Once you decide to say no, explain why. Your explanation should be brief, because lengthy explanations might create room for debate (which could be exhausting and/or time-consuming), lead to giving in to their inappropriate request, and/or lead them to become more frustrated and misunderstood.1

Be empathetic, and re-establish rapport.

After declining a patient’s request, you may have to use empathy to re-establish rapport if it has been damaged. After being told no, your patient may feel frustrated or powerless. Acknowledge their feelings with statements such as “I know this is not want you wanted to hear” or “I can see you are irritated.”Accept your patient’s negative emotions, rather than minimizing them or trying to fix them.1,3

Although we may want to say “yes” when our patients ask us for certain medications, work excuses, etc, often it is more appropriate to say “no” because the conditions do not support those requests. Saying no to a patient usually is not a comfortable experience, but we should not say yes to avoid hurting their feelings, damaging our rapport with them, or having them post potential negative reviews about us. For many of us, saying no is a skill that does not come naturally. For some, bluntly telling a patient no may work, but this approach is more likely to be ineffective. At the same time, saying no in an equivocal manner may weaken our patients’ confidence in us and could be displeasing for both our patients and us.1,2

We should say no in an “effective, professional manner that fosters good patient care and preserves the therapeutic relationship, while supporting physician well-being.”1 In this article, I provide practical tips for saying no to inappropriate patient requests in an emphatic manner so that we can feel more empowered and less uncomfortable.

Acknowledge and analyze your discomfort.

Before saying no, recognize that you are feeling uncomfortable with your patient’s inappropriate request. This uncomfortable feeling is a probable cue that there is likely no appropriate context for their request, ie, saying yes would be poor medical care, illegal, against policy, etc.1,3 In most cases, you should be able to identify the reason(s) your patient’s request feels inappropriate and uncomfortable.

Gather information and provide an explanation.

Ask your patient for more information about their request so you can determine if there are any underlying factors and if any additional information is needed.3 Once you decide to say no, explain why. Your explanation should be brief, because lengthy explanations might create room for debate (which could be exhausting and/or time-consuming), lead to giving in to their inappropriate request, and/or lead them to become more frustrated and misunderstood.1

Be empathetic, and re-establish rapport.

After declining a patient’s request, you may have to use empathy to re-establish rapport if it has been damaged. After being told no, your patient may feel frustrated or powerless. Acknowledge their feelings with statements such as “I know this is not want you wanted to hear” or “I can see you are irritated.”Accept your patient’s negative emotions, rather than minimizing them or trying to fix them.1,3

References

1. Kane M, Chambliss ML. Getting to no: how to respond to inappropriate patient requests. Fam Prac Manag. 2018;25(1):25-30.

2. Paterniti DA, Facher TL, Cipri CS, et al. Getting to “no”: strategies primary care physicians use to deny patient requests. Arch Intern Med. 2010;170(4):381-388.

3. Huben-Kearney A. Just say no to certain patient requests—and here’s how. Psychiatric  News. 2021;56(2):13.

References

1. Kane M, Chambliss ML. Getting to no: how to respond to inappropriate patient requests. Fam Prac Manag. 2018;25(1):25-30.

2. Paterniti DA, Facher TL, Cipri CS, et al. Getting to “no”: strategies primary care physicians use to deny patient requests. Arch Intern Med. 2010;170(4):381-388.

3. Huben-Kearney A. Just say no to certain patient requests—and here’s how. Psychiatric  News. 2021;56(2):13.

Issue
Current Psychiatry - 21(3)
Issue
Current Psychiatry - 21(3)
Page Number
52
Page Number
52
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.
Conference Recap Checkbox
Not Conference Recap
Clinical Edge
Display the Slideshow in this Article
Medscape Article
Display survey writer
Reuters content
Disable Inline Native ads
WebMD Article
Article PDF Media

Closing your practice: What to consider

Article Type
Changed
Tue, 03/01/2022 - 09:03

Closing your practice can be a stressful experience, and it requires careful planning. The process requires numerous steps, such as informing your staff, notifying your patients, closing accounts with your vendors and suppliers, storing medical records, and following applicable federal and state laws for dissolving your practice.1,2 Many of these steps may require consulting with an attorney, an accountant, and your malpractice insurance carrier.1,2 Although the recommendations I provide in this article are not exhaustive, when faced with closing your practice, be sure to consider the following factors.

Notify staff and patients.

Select a date to close your practice that will allow you to stop taking new patients, provides adequate leeway for your staff to find new employment and for you to hire temporary staff if needed, ensures you meet your obligations to your staff, such as payroll, and gives you time to set up appropriate continuity of care for your patients. In addition to verbally notifying your patients of your practice’s closing, inform them in writing (whether hand-delivered or via certified mail with return receipt) of the date of the practice’s closure, reason for the closure, cancellation of scheduled appointments after the closure date, referral options, and how they can obtain a copy of their medical records.1,2 Make sure your patients have an adequate supply of their medications before the closure.

Notify other parties.

Inform all suppliers, vendors, contracted service providers, insurance broker(s) for your practice, and payers (including Medicare and Medicaid, if applicable) of your intent to close your practice.1,2 Provide payers with a forwarding address to send payments that resolve after your practice closes, and request final invoices from vendors and suppliers so you can close your accounts with them. If you don’t own the building in which your practice is located, notify the building management in accordance with the provisions of your lease.1,2 Give cancellation notices to utilities and ancillary services (eg, labs, imaging facilities) to which you refer your patients, and notify facilities where you are credentialed and have admitting privileges.1,2 Inform your state medical licensing board, your state’s controlled substance division, and the Drug Enforcement Administration, because these agencies have requirements regarding changing the status of your medical license (if you decide to retire), continuing or surrendering your state and federal controlled substance registration, and disposal of prescription medications and prescription pads.1,2 Contact your local post office and delivery services with your change of address.

Address other considerations.

Set up a medical record retention and destruction plan in accordance with state and federal regulations, arrange for the safe storage for both paper and electronic medical records, and make sure storage facilities have experience handling confidential, Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA)-sensitive patient information.1,2 In addition, establish a process for permanently deleting all HIPAA-sensitive patient information from any equipment that you don’t intend to keep.1,2

References

1. Funicelli AM. Risk management checklist when closing your practice. Psychiatric News. 2020;55(23):11.

2. American Academy of Family Physicians. Closing your practice checklist. Accessed January 21, 2022. https://www.aafp.org/dam/AAFP/documents/practice_management/admin_staffing/ClosingPracticeChecklist.pdf

Article PDF
Author and Disclosure Information

Kaustubh G. Joshi, MD

Dr. Joshi is Associate Professor of Clinical Psychiatry and Associate Director, Forensic Psychiatry Fellowship, Department of Neuropsychiatry and Behavioral Science, University of South Carolina School of Medicine, Columbia, South Carolina.

Disclosure

The author reports no financial relationships with any companies whose products are mentioned in this article, or with manufacturers of competing products.

Issue
Current Psychiatry - 21(3)
Publications
Topics
Page Number
e1-e2
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

Kaustubh G. Joshi, MD

Dr. Joshi is Associate Professor of Clinical Psychiatry and Associate Director, Forensic Psychiatry Fellowship, Department of Neuropsychiatry and Behavioral Science, University of South Carolina School of Medicine, Columbia, South Carolina.

Disclosure

The author reports no financial relationships with any companies whose products are mentioned in this article, or with manufacturers of competing products.

Author and Disclosure Information

Kaustubh G. Joshi, MD

Dr. Joshi is Associate Professor of Clinical Psychiatry and Associate Director, Forensic Psychiatry Fellowship, Department of Neuropsychiatry and Behavioral Science, University of South Carolina School of Medicine, Columbia, South Carolina.

Disclosure

The author reports no financial relationships with any companies whose products are mentioned in this article, or with manufacturers of competing products.

Article PDF
Article PDF

Closing your practice can be a stressful experience, and it requires careful planning. The process requires numerous steps, such as informing your staff, notifying your patients, closing accounts with your vendors and suppliers, storing medical records, and following applicable federal and state laws for dissolving your practice.1,2 Many of these steps may require consulting with an attorney, an accountant, and your malpractice insurance carrier.1,2 Although the recommendations I provide in this article are not exhaustive, when faced with closing your practice, be sure to consider the following factors.

Notify staff and patients.

Select a date to close your practice that will allow you to stop taking new patients, provides adequate leeway for your staff to find new employment and for you to hire temporary staff if needed, ensures you meet your obligations to your staff, such as payroll, and gives you time to set up appropriate continuity of care for your patients. In addition to verbally notifying your patients of your practice’s closing, inform them in writing (whether hand-delivered or via certified mail with return receipt) of the date of the practice’s closure, reason for the closure, cancellation of scheduled appointments after the closure date, referral options, and how they can obtain a copy of their medical records.1,2 Make sure your patients have an adequate supply of their medications before the closure.

Notify other parties.

Inform all suppliers, vendors, contracted service providers, insurance broker(s) for your practice, and payers (including Medicare and Medicaid, if applicable) of your intent to close your practice.1,2 Provide payers with a forwarding address to send payments that resolve after your practice closes, and request final invoices from vendors and suppliers so you can close your accounts with them. If you don’t own the building in which your practice is located, notify the building management in accordance with the provisions of your lease.1,2 Give cancellation notices to utilities and ancillary services (eg, labs, imaging facilities) to which you refer your patients, and notify facilities where you are credentialed and have admitting privileges.1,2 Inform your state medical licensing board, your state’s controlled substance division, and the Drug Enforcement Administration, because these agencies have requirements regarding changing the status of your medical license (if you decide to retire), continuing or surrendering your state and federal controlled substance registration, and disposal of prescription medications and prescription pads.1,2 Contact your local post office and delivery services with your change of address.

Address other considerations.

Set up a medical record retention and destruction plan in accordance with state and federal regulations, arrange for the safe storage for both paper and electronic medical records, and make sure storage facilities have experience handling confidential, Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA)-sensitive patient information.1,2 In addition, establish a process for permanently deleting all HIPAA-sensitive patient information from any equipment that you don’t intend to keep.1,2

Closing your practice can be a stressful experience, and it requires careful planning. The process requires numerous steps, such as informing your staff, notifying your patients, closing accounts with your vendors and suppliers, storing medical records, and following applicable federal and state laws for dissolving your practice.1,2 Many of these steps may require consulting with an attorney, an accountant, and your malpractice insurance carrier.1,2 Although the recommendations I provide in this article are not exhaustive, when faced with closing your practice, be sure to consider the following factors.

Notify staff and patients.

Select a date to close your practice that will allow you to stop taking new patients, provides adequate leeway for your staff to find new employment and for you to hire temporary staff if needed, ensures you meet your obligations to your staff, such as payroll, and gives you time to set up appropriate continuity of care for your patients. In addition to verbally notifying your patients of your practice’s closing, inform them in writing (whether hand-delivered or via certified mail with return receipt) of the date of the practice’s closure, reason for the closure, cancellation of scheduled appointments after the closure date, referral options, and how they can obtain a copy of their medical records.1,2 Make sure your patients have an adequate supply of their medications before the closure.

Notify other parties.

Inform all suppliers, vendors, contracted service providers, insurance broker(s) for your practice, and payers (including Medicare and Medicaid, if applicable) of your intent to close your practice.1,2 Provide payers with a forwarding address to send payments that resolve after your practice closes, and request final invoices from vendors and suppliers so you can close your accounts with them. If you don’t own the building in which your practice is located, notify the building management in accordance with the provisions of your lease.1,2 Give cancellation notices to utilities and ancillary services (eg, labs, imaging facilities) to which you refer your patients, and notify facilities where you are credentialed and have admitting privileges.1,2 Inform your state medical licensing board, your state’s controlled substance division, and the Drug Enforcement Administration, because these agencies have requirements regarding changing the status of your medical license (if you decide to retire), continuing or surrendering your state and federal controlled substance registration, and disposal of prescription medications and prescription pads.1,2 Contact your local post office and delivery services with your change of address.

Address other considerations.

Set up a medical record retention and destruction plan in accordance with state and federal regulations, arrange for the safe storage for both paper and electronic medical records, and make sure storage facilities have experience handling confidential, Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA)-sensitive patient information.1,2 In addition, establish a process for permanently deleting all HIPAA-sensitive patient information from any equipment that you don’t intend to keep.1,2

References

1. Funicelli AM. Risk management checklist when closing your practice. Psychiatric News. 2020;55(23):11.

2. American Academy of Family Physicians. Closing your practice checklist. Accessed January 21, 2022. https://www.aafp.org/dam/AAFP/documents/practice_management/admin_staffing/ClosingPracticeChecklist.pdf

References

1. Funicelli AM. Risk management checklist when closing your practice. Psychiatric News. 2020;55(23):11.

2. American Academy of Family Physicians. Closing your practice checklist. Accessed January 21, 2022. https://www.aafp.org/dam/AAFP/documents/practice_management/admin_staffing/ClosingPracticeChecklist.pdf

Issue
Current Psychiatry - 21(3)
Issue
Current Psychiatry - 21(3)
Page Number
e1-e2
Page Number
e1-e2
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.
Conference Recap Checkbox
Not Conference Recap
Clinical Edge
Display the Slideshow in this Article
Medscape Article
Display survey writer
Reuters content
Disable Inline Native ads
WebMD Article
Article PDF Media

Inpatient violence: Take steps to reduce your risk

Article Type
Changed
Tue, 01/04/2022 - 10:58

Inpatient violence is a significant problem for psychiatric facilities because it can have serious physical and psychological consequences for both staff and patients.1 Victimized staff can experience decreased productivity and emotional distress, while victimized patients can experience disrupted treatment and delayed discharge.1 Twenty-five to 35% of psychiatric inpatients display violent behavior during their hospitalization.1 A subset are extreme offenders.1,2 This small group of violent patients accounts for the majority of inpatient violence and the most serious injuries.1,2

Reducing inpatient violence starts with conducting a targeted violence risk assessment to identify patients who are at elevated risk of being violent. Although conducting a targeted violence risk assessment is beyond the scope of this article, here I outline practical steps that clinicians can take to reduce the risk of inpatient violence. These steps complement and overlap with those I described in “Workplace violence: Enhance your safety in outpatient settings” (Pearls, Current Psychiatry, August 2021, p. 37-38). These approaches should be customized for your setting with the possible assistance and input of legal counsel, risk management, and law enforcement.3

Identify underlying motives. Inpatient violence is often a result of 3 primary psychiatric etiologies: difficulty with impulse control, symptoms of psychosis, or predatory traits.1 Impulsivity drives most of the violence on inpatient units, followed by predatory violence and symptoms of psychosis.1 Once you identify the psychiatric motive, you can develop an individualized, tailored treatment plan to reduce the risk of violence. The treatment plan can include using de-escalation techniques, administering scheduled and as-needed medications to target underlying symptoms, having patients assume responsibility for their behaviors, holding patients accountable for their behaviors, and other psychosocial interventions.1 Use seclusion and restraint only when it is the least restrictive means of providing safety.1,4

Develop plans and policies. As you would do in an outpatient setting, assess for hazards within the inpatient unit. Plan for the possible types of violence that may occur on the unit (eg, physical violence against hospital personnel and/or other patients, verbal harassment, etc).3 Develop policies and procedures to identify, communicate, track, and document patients’ concerning behaviors (eg, posting a safety board where staff can record aggressive behaviors and other safety issues).3,4 When developing these plans and policies, include patients by creating patient/staff workgroups to develop expectations for civil behavior that apply to both patients and staff, as well as training patients to co-lead groups dealing with accepting responsibility for their own recovery.5 These plans and policies should include informing patients that threats and violence will not be tolerated. Frequently review these plans and policies with patients and staff.

Provide communication and education. Maintain strong psychiatric leadership on the unit that encourages open lines of communication. Encourage staff to promptly report incidents. Frequently ask staff if they have any safety concerns, and solicit their opinions on how to reduce risks.4 Include discussions about safety during staff and community meetings. Communicate patients’ behaviors that are distressing or undesired (eg, threats, harassment, etc) to all unit personnel.3 Notify staff when you plan to interact with a patient who is at risk for violence or is acutely agitated.4 Teach staff how to recognize the nonverbal warning signs of behavior escalation and provide training on proper de-escalation and response.3,4 Also train staff on how to develop strong therapeutic alliances with patients.1 After a violent incident, use the postincident debriefing session to gather information that can be used to develop additional interventions and reduce the risk of subsequent violence.1

Implement common-sense strategies. Ensure that there are adequate numbers of nursing staff during each shift.1 Avoid overcrowded units, hallways, and common areas. Consider additional monitoring during unit transition times, such as during shift changes, meals, and medication administration.1 Avoid excessive noise.1 Employ one-to-one staff observation as clinically indicated.1 Avoid taking an authoritarian stance when explaining to patients why their requests have been denied4; if possible, when you are unable to meet a patient’s demands, offer them choices.1,4 If feasible, accompany patients to a calmer space where they can de-escalate.1 Install video surveillance cameras at entrances, exits, and other strategic locations and post signs signaling their presence.3 Install panic buttons at the nursing station and other areas (eg, restrooms).3

Ensure your personal safety. As mentioned previously, do not interact with a patient who has recently been aggressive or has voiced threats without adequate staff support.4 During the patient encounter, leave space between you and the patient.1 Avoid having your back to the exit of the room,3,4 and make sure the patient is not blocking the exit and that you can leave the room quickly if needed. Don’t wear anything that could be used as a weapon against you (eg, ties or necklaces) or could impede your escape.4 Avoid wearing valuables that might be damaged during a “take down.”4 If feasible, wear an audible alarm.3

 

References

1. Fisher K. Inpatient violence. Psychiatr Clin North Am. 2016;39(4):567-577.

2. Kraus JE, Sheitman BB. Characteristics of violent behavior in a large state psychiatric hospital. Psychiatr Serv. 2004;55(2):183-185.

3. Neal D. Seven actions to ensure safety in psychiatric office settings. Psychiatric News. 2020;55(7):15.

4. Xiong GL, Newman WJ. Take CAUTION in emergency and inpatient psychiatric settings. Current Psychiatry. 2013;12(7):9-10.

5. Hardy DW, Patel M. Reduce inpatient violence: 6 strategies. Current Psychiatry. 2011;10(5):80-81.

Article PDF
Author and Disclosure Information

Dr. Joshi is Associate Professor of Clinical Psychiatry and Associate Director, Forensic Psychiatry Fellowship, Department of Neuropsychiatry and Behavioral Science, University of South Carolina School of Medicine, Columbia, South Carolina.

Disclosure

The author reports no financial relationships with any companies whose products are mentioned in this article, or with manufacturers of competing products.

Issue
Current Psychiatry - 21(1)
Publications
Topics
Page Number
33-34
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

Dr. Joshi is Associate Professor of Clinical Psychiatry and Associate Director, Forensic Psychiatry Fellowship, Department of Neuropsychiatry and Behavioral Science, University of South Carolina School of Medicine, Columbia, South Carolina.

Disclosure

The author reports no financial relationships with any companies whose products are mentioned in this article, or with manufacturers of competing products.

Author and Disclosure Information

Dr. Joshi is Associate Professor of Clinical Psychiatry and Associate Director, Forensic Psychiatry Fellowship, Department of Neuropsychiatry and Behavioral Science, University of South Carolina School of Medicine, Columbia, South Carolina.

Disclosure

The author reports no financial relationships with any companies whose products are mentioned in this article, or with manufacturers of competing products.

Article PDF
Article PDF

Inpatient violence is a significant problem for psychiatric facilities because it can have serious physical and psychological consequences for both staff and patients.1 Victimized staff can experience decreased productivity and emotional distress, while victimized patients can experience disrupted treatment and delayed discharge.1 Twenty-five to 35% of psychiatric inpatients display violent behavior during their hospitalization.1 A subset are extreme offenders.1,2 This small group of violent patients accounts for the majority of inpatient violence and the most serious injuries.1,2

Reducing inpatient violence starts with conducting a targeted violence risk assessment to identify patients who are at elevated risk of being violent. Although conducting a targeted violence risk assessment is beyond the scope of this article, here I outline practical steps that clinicians can take to reduce the risk of inpatient violence. These steps complement and overlap with those I described in “Workplace violence: Enhance your safety in outpatient settings” (Pearls, Current Psychiatry, August 2021, p. 37-38). These approaches should be customized for your setting with the possible assistance and input of legal counsel, risk management, and law enforcement.3

Identify underlying motives. Inpatient violence is often a result of 3 primary psychiatric etiologies: difficulty with impulse control, symptoms of psychosis, or predatory traits.1 Impulsivity drives most of the violence on inpatient units, followed by predatory violence and symptoms of psychosis.1 Once you identify the psychiatric motive, you can develop an individualized, tailored treatment plan to reduce the risk of violence. The treatment plan can include using de-escalation techniques, administering scheduled and as-needed medications to target underlying symptoms, having patients assume responsibility for their behaviors, holding patients accountable for their behaviors, and other psychosocial interventions.1 Use seclusion and restraint only when it is the least restrictive means of providing safety.1,4

Develop plans and policies. As you would do in an outpatient setting, assess for hazards within the inpatient unit. Plan for the possible types of violence that may occur on the unit (eg, physical violence against hospital personnel and/or other patients, verbal harassment, etc).3 Develop policies and procedures to identify, communicate, track, and document patients’ concerning behaviors (eg, posting a safety board where staff can record aggressive behaviors and other safety issues).3,4 When developing these plans and policies, include patients by creating patient/staff workgroups to develop expectations for civil behavior that apply to both patients and staff, as well as training patients to co-lead groups dealing with accepting responsibility for their own recovery.5 These plans and policies should include informing patients that threats and violence will not be tolerated. Frequently review these plans and policies with patients and staff.

Provide communication and education. Maintain strong psychiatric leadership on the unit that encourages open lines of communication. Encourage staff to promptly report incidents. Frequently ask staff if they have any safety concerns, and solicit their opinions on how to reduce risks.4 Include discussions about safety during staff and community meetings. Communicate patients’ behaviors that are distressing or undesired (eg, threats, harassment, etc) to all unit personnel.3 Notify staff when you plan to interact with a patient who is at risk for violence or is acutely agitated.4 Teach staff how to recognize the nonverbal warning signs of behavior escalation and provide training on proper de-escalation and response.3,4 Also train staff on how to develop strong therapeutic alliances with patients.1 After a violent incident, use the postincident debriefing session to gather information that can be used to develop additional interventions and reduce the risk of subsequent violence.1

Implement common-sense strategies. Ensure that there are adequate numbers of nursing staff during each shift.1 Avoid overcrowded units, hallways, and common areas. Consider additional monitoring during unit transition times, such as during shift changes, meals, and medication administration.1 Avoid excessive noise.1 Employ one-to-one staff observation as clinically indicated.1 Avoid taking an authoritarian stance when explaining to patients why their requests have been denied4; if possible, when you are unable to meet a patient’s demands, offer them choices.1,4 If feasible, accompany patients to a calmer space where they can de-escalate.1 Install video surveillance cameras at entrances, exits, and other strategic locations and post signs signaling their presence.3 Install panic buttons at the nursing station and other areas (eg, restrooms).3

Ensure your personal safety. As mentioned previously, do not interact with a patient who has recently been aggressive or has voiced threats without adequate staff support.4 During the patient encounter, leave space between you and the patient.1 Avoid having your back to the exit of the room,3,4 and make sure the patient is not blocking the exit and that you can leave the room quickly if needed. Don’t wear anything that could be used as a weapon against you (eg, ties or necklaces) or could impede your escape.4 Avoid wearing valuables that might be damaged during a “take down.”4 If feasible, wear an audible alarm.3

 

Inpatient violence is a significant problem for psychiatric facilities because it can have serious physical and psychological consequences for both staff and patients.1 Victimized staff can experience decreased productivity and emotional distress, while victimized patients can experience disrupted treatment and delayed discharge.1 Twenty-five to 35% of psychiatric inpatients display violent behavior during their hospitalization.1 A subset are extreme offenders.1,2 This small group of violent patients accounts for the majority of inpatient violence and the most serious injuries.1,2

Reducing inpatient violence starts with conducting a targeted violence risk assessment to identify patients who are at elevated risk of being violent. Although conducting a targeted violence risk assessment is beyond the scope of this article, here I outline practical steps that clinicians can take to reduce the risk of inpatient violence. These steps complement and overlap with those I described in “Workplace violence: Enhance your safety in outpatient settings” (Pearls, Current Psychiatry, August 2021, p. 37-38). These approaches should be customized for your setting with the possible assistance and input of legal counsel, risk management, and law enforcement.3

Identify underlying motives. Inpatient violence is often a result of 3 primary psychiatric etiologies: difficulty with impulse control, symptoms of psychosis, or predatory traits.1 Impulsivity drives most of the violence on inpatient units, followed by predatory violence and symptoms of psychosis.1 Once you identify the psychiatric motive, you can develop an individualized, tailored treatment plan to reduce the risk of violence. The treatment plan can include using de-escalation techniques, administering scheduled and as-needed medications to target underlying symptoms, having patients assume responsibility for their behaviors, holding patients accountable for their behaviors, and other psychosocial interventions.1 Use seclusion and restraint only when it is the least restrictive means of providing safety.1,4

Develop plans and policies. As you would do in an outpatient setting, assess for hazards within the inpatient unit. Plan for the possible types of violence that may occur on the unit (eg, physical violence against hospital personnel and/or other patients, verbal harassment, etc).3 Develop policies and procedures to identify, communicate, track, and document patients’ concerning behaviors (eg, posting a safety board where staff can record aggressive behaviors and other safety issues).3,4 When developing these plans and policies, include patients by creating patient/staff workgroups to develop expectations for civil behavior that apply to both patients and staff, as well as training patients to co-lead groups dealing with accepting responsibility for their own recovery.5 These plans and policies should include informing patients that threats and violence will not be tolerated. Frequently review these plans and policies with patients and staff.

Provide communication and education. Maintain strong psychiatric leadership on the unit that encourages open lines of communication. Encourage staff to promptly report incidents. Frequently ask staff if they have any safety concerns, and solicit their opinions on how to reduce risks.4 Include discussions about safety during staff and community meetings. Communicate patients’ behaviors that are distressing or undesired (eg, threats, harassment, etc) to all unit personnel.3 Notify staff when you plan to interact with a patient who is at risk for violence or is acutely agitated.4 Teach staff how to recognize the nonverbal warning signs of behavior escalation and provide training on proper de-escalation and response.3,4 Also train staff on how to develop strong therapeutic alliances with patients.1 After a violent incident, use the postincident debriefing session to gather information that can be used to develop additional interventions and reduce the risk of subsequent violence.1

Implement common-sense strategies. Ensure that there are adequate numbers of nursing staff during each shift.1 Avoid overcrowded units, hallways, and common areas. Consider additional monitoring during unit transition times, such as during shift changes, meals, and medication administration.1 Avoid excessive noise.1 Employ one-to-one staff observation as clinically indicated.1 Avoid taking an authoritarian stance when explaining to patients why their requests have been denied4; if possible, when you are unable to meet a patient’s demands, offer them choices.1,4 If feasible, accompany patients to a calmer space where they can de-escalate.1 Install video surveillance cameras at entrances, exits, and other strategic locations and post signs signaling their presence.3 Install panic buttons at the nursing station and other areas (eg, restrooms).3

Ensure your personal safety. As mentioned previously, do not interact with a patient who has recently been aggressive or has voiced threats without adequate staff support.4 During the patient encounter, leave space between you and the patient.1 Avoid having your back to the exit of the room,3,4 and make sure the patient is not blocking the exit and that you can leave the room quickly if needed. Don’t wear anything that could be used as a weapon against you (eg, ties or necklaces) or could impede your escape.4 Avoid wearing valuables that might be damaged during a “take down.”4 If feasible, wear an audible alarm.3

 

References

1. Fisher K. Inpatient violence. Psychiatr Clin North Am. 2016;39(4):567-577.

2. Kraus JE, Sheitman BB. Characteristics of violent behavior in a large state psychiatric hospital. Psychiatr Serv. 2004;55(2):183-185.

3. Neal D. Seven actions to ensure safety in psychiatric office settings. Psychiatric News. 2020;55(7):15.

4. Xiong GL, Newman WJ. Take CAUTION in emergency and inpatient psychiatric settings. Current Psychiatry. 2013;12(7):9-10.

5. Hardy DW, Patel M. Reduce inpatient violence: 6 strategies. Current Psychiatry. 2011;10(5):80-81.

References

1. Fisher K. Inpatient violence. Psychiatr Clin North Am. 2016;39(4):567-577.

2. Kraus JE, Sheitman BB. Characteristics of violent behavior in a large state psychiatric hospital. Psychiatr Serv. 2004;55(2):183-185.

3. Neal D. Seven actions to ensure safety in psychiatric office settings. Psychiatric News. 2020;55(7):15.

4. Xiong GL, Newman WJ. Take CAUTION in emergency and inpatient psychiatric settings. Current Psychiatry. 2013;12(7):9-10.

5. Hardy DW, Patel M. Reduce inpatient violence: 6 strategies. Current Psychiatry. 2011;10(5):80-81.

Issue
Current Psychiatry - 21(1)
Issue
Current Psychiatry - 21(1)
Page Number
33-34
Page Number
33-34
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.
Conference Recap Checkbox
Not Conference Recap
Clinical Edge
Display the Slideshow in this Article
Medscape Article
Display survey writer
Reuters content
Disable Inline Native ads
WebMD Article
Article PDF Media

Vaping: Understand the risks

Article Type
Changed
Thu, 12/02/2021 - 15:25

From 2017 to 2018, the 30-day prevalence of “vaping” nicotine rose dramatically among 8th graders, 10th graders, 12th graders, college students, and young adults; the increase was the greatest among college students.1 As vaping has become a common phenomenon in our society, it is prudent to have a basic understanding of what vaping is, and its potential health risks.

How it works

Vaping is the inhaling and exhaling of aerosol that is produced by a device.2 Users can vape nicotine, tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), or synthetic drugs. The aerosol, often mistaken for water vapor, consists of fine particles that contain varying amounts of toxic chemicals and heavy metals that enter the lungs and bloodstream when vaping.2 In general, vaping devices consist of a mouthpiece, a battery, a cartridge for containing the e-juice/e-liquid, and a heating component that turns the e-juice/e-liquid into vapor.2 The e-juice/e-liquid usually contains a propylene glycol or vegetable glycerin-based liquid with nicotine, THC, or synthetic drugs.2 The e-juice/e-liquid also contains flavorings, additives, and other chemicals and metals (but not tobacco).2

There are 4 types of vaping devices3:

E-cigarettes. This first generation of vaping devices was introduced to US markets in 2007. E-cigarettes look similar to cigarettes and come in disposable or rechargeable forms.3 They may emit a light when the user puffs. E-cigarettes have shorter battery lives and are less expensive than other vaping devices.

Vape pens. These second-generation vaping devices resemble fountain pens. Vape pens also come in disposable and rechargeable forms.3 They can be refilled with e-juice/e-liquid.3

Vaping mods. These third-generation vaping devices were created when users modified items such as flashlights to create a more powerful vaping experience; however, these self-modifications often are unsafe. Vaping mods are larger than vape pens and e-cigarettes and include modification options. They also have large-capacity batteries that are replaceable. Vaping mods are typically rechargeable and deliver more nicotine than earlier-generation vaping devices.

Pod systems. Pod systems, such as Juul, are the latest generation of vaping devices. These small, sleek devices resemble a USB drive.3 They can be recharged on a laptop or any USB charger.3 Pods combine the portability of e-cigarettes or vape pens with the power of a mod system. There are 2 types of pod systems: open and closed. Open pod systems consist of removable pods that are filled with the user’s choice of e-juice/e-liquid and then replaced after being refilled several times. Closed pod systems are purchased pre-filled with e-juice/e-liquid and are disposable, similar to single-use coffee pods. Juul is the most popular vape brand in the United States.4 For a visual guide of the different vaping devices, see https://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/basic_information/e-cigarettes/pdfs/ecigarette-or-vaping-products-visual-dictionary-508.pdf
 

What are the risks?

Vaping is relatively new, so the long-term health effects are not well studied. Although less harmful than smoking cigarettes, vaping is still not safe because users are exposed to chemicals in the aerosol, such as nicotine, heavy metals such as lead, volatile organic compounds, and cancer-causing agents.3 Vaping nicotine can result in the same cardiac and pulmonary complications as smoking cigarettes. Vaping nicotine can also be more addictive than smoking cigarettes because users can buy cartridges with higher concentrations of nicotine or increase the vaping device’s voltage to get a greater “hit” of nicotine (or whatever substance the user is vaping.) Vaping devices can also cause unintentional injuries due to fires and explosions from defective batteries.3

Vaping—particularly vaping THC—has been linked to a condition called e-cigarette, or vaping, product use-associated lung injury (EVALI).5 As of February 18, 2020, the CDC had received reports of approximately 2,800 patients with EVALI who were hospitalized or had died.5 Most EVALI cases have been linked to e-cigarette or vaping products that contained THC, particularly products obtained from informal sources such as friends, family, or in-person or online dealers.5 Vitamin E acetate, an additive in some THC-containing vaping products, has been strongly linked to EVALI.5 When ingested as a vitamin supplement or applied to the skin, vitamin E usually is harmless, but when inhaled, it may interfere with normal lung functioning.5 The CDC recommends that individuals who vape do not use products that contain THC; avoid getting vaping products from informal sources, such as friends, family, or online dealers; and not modify or add any substances to a vaping device other than as intended by the manufacturer.5

 

References
  1. Schulenberg JE, Johnston LD, O’Malley PM, et al; the University of Michigan Institute for Social Research. Monitoring the Future national survey results on drug use, 1975-2018. Volume 2. College students and adults ages 19-60. Published July 2019. Accessed November 12, 2021. http://www.monitoringthefuture.org/pubs/monographs/mtf-vol2_2018.pdf
  2. Partnership to End Addiction. Vaping & e-cigarettes. Last updated May 2021. Accessed November 12, 2021. https://drugfree.org/drugs/e-cigarettes-vaping/
  3. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. About electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes). Last reviewed February 24, 2020. Accessed June 20, 2020. https://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/basic_information/e-cigarettes/about-e-cigarettes.html
  4. Partnership to End Addiction. What parents need to know about vaping. Published May 2020. Accessed October 27, 2021. https://drugfree.org/article/what-parents-need-to-know-about-vaping/
  5. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Outbreak of lung injury associated with the use of e-cigarette, or vaping, products. Last reviewed August 3, 2021. Accessed November 19, 2021. https://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/basic_information/e-cigarettes/severe-lung-disease.html#overview
Article PDF
Author and Disclosure Information

Dr. Joshi is Associate Professor of Clinical Psychiatry and Associate Director, Forensic Psychiatry Fellowship, Department of Neuropsychiatry and Behavioral Science, University of South Carolina School of Medicine, Columbia, South Carolina.

Disclosure

The author reports no financial relationships with any companies whose products are mentioned in this article, or with manufacturers of competing products.

Issue
Current Psychiatry - 20(12)
Publications
Topics
Page Number
e5-e6
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

Dr. Joshi is Associate Professor of Clinical Psychiatry and Associate Director, Forensic Psychiatry Fellowship, Department of Neuropsychiatry and Behavioral Science, University of South Carolina School of Medicine, Columbia, South Carolina.

Disclosure

The author reports no financial relationships with any companies whose products are mentioned in this article, or with manufacturers of competing products.

Author and Disclosure Information

Dr. Joshi is Associate Professor of Clinical Psychiatry and Associate Director, Forensic Psychiatry Fellowship, Department of Neuropsychiatry and Behavioral Science, University of South Carolina School of Medicine, Columbia, South Carolina.

Disclosure

The author reports no financial relationships with any companies whose products are mentioned in this article, or with manufacturers of competing products.

Article PDF
Article PDF

From 2017 to 2018, the 30-day prevalence of “vaping” nicotine rose dramatically among 8th graders, 10th graders, 12th graders, college students, and young adults; the increase was the greatest among college students.1 As vaping has become a common phenomenon in our society, it is prudent to have a basic understanding of what vaping is, and its potential health risks.

How it works

Vaping is the inhaling and exhaling of aerosol that is produced by a device.2 Users can vape nicotine, tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), or synthetic drugs. The aerosol, often mistaken for water vapor, consists of fine particles that contain varying amounts of toxic chemicals and heavy metals that enter the lungs and bloodstream when vaping.2 In general, vaping devices consist of a mouthpiece, a battery, a cartridge for containing the e-juice/e-liquid, and a heating component that turns the e-juice/e-liquid into vapor.2 The e-juice/e-liquid usually contains a propylene glycol or vegetable glycerin-based liquid with nicotine, THC, or synthetic drugs.2 The e-juice/e-liquid also contains flavorings, additives, and other chemicals and metals (but not tobacco).2

There are 4 types of vaping devices3:

E-cigarettes. This first generation of vaping devices was introduced to US markets in 2007. E-cigarettes look similar to cigarettes and come in disposable or rechargeable forms.3 They may emit a light when the user puffs. E-cigarettes have shorter battery lives and are less expensive than other vaping devices.

Vape pens. These second-generation vaping devices resemble fountain pens. Vape pens also come in disposable and rechargeable forms.3 They can be refilled with e-juice/e-liquid.3

Vaping mods. These third-generation vaping devices were created when users modified items such as flashlights to create a more powerful vaping experience; however, these self-modifications often are unsafe. Vaping mods are larger than vape pens and e-cigarettes and include modification options. They also have large-capacity batteries that are replaceable. Vaping mods are typically rechargeable and deliver more nicotine than earlier-generation vaping devices.

Pod systems. Pod systems, such as Juul, are the latest generation of vaping devices. These small, sleek devices resemble a USB drive.3 They can be recharged on a laptop or any USB charger.3 Pods combine the portability of e-cigarettes or vape pens with the power of a mod system. There are 2 types of pod systems: open and closed. Open pod systems consist of removable pods that are filled with the user’s choice of e-juice/e-liquid and then replaced after being refilled several times. Closed pod systems are purchased pre-filled with e-juice/e-liquid and are disposable, similar to single-use coffee pods. Juul is the most popular vape brand in the United States.4 For a visual guide of the different vaping devices, see https://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/basic_information/e-cigarettes/pdfs/ecigarette-or-vaping-products-visual-dictionary-508.pdf
 

What are the risks?

Vaping is relatively new, so the long-term health effects are not well studied. Although less harmful than smoking cigarettes, vaping is still not safe because users are exposed to chemicals in the aerosol, such as nicotine, heavy metals such as lead, volatile organic compounds, and cancer-causing agents.3 Vaping nicotine can result in the same cardiac and pulmonary complications as smoking cigarettes. Vaping nicotine can also be more addictive than smoking cigarettes because users can buy cartridges with higher concentrations of nicotine or increase the vaping device’s voltage to get a greater “hit” of nicotine (or whatever substance the user is vaping.) Vaping devices can also cause unintentional injuries due to fires and explosions from defective batteries.3

Vaping—particularly vaping THC—has been linked to a condition called e-cigarette, or vaping, product use-associated lung injury (EVALI).5 As of February 18, 2020, the CDC had received reports of approximately 2,800 patients with EVALI who were hospitalized or had died.5 Most EVALI cases have been linked to e-cigarette or vaping products that contained THC, particularly products obtained from informal sources such as friends, family, or in-person or online dealers.5 Vitamin E acetate, an additive in some THC-containing vaping products, has been strongly linked to EVALI.5 When ingested as a vitamin supplement or applied to the skin, vitamin E usually is harmless, but when inhaled, it may interfere with normal lung functioning.5 The CDC recommends that individuals who vape do not use products that contain THC; avoid getting vaping products from informal sources, such as friends, family, or online dealers; and not modify or add any substances to a vaping device other than as intended by the manufacturer.5

 

From 2017 to 2018, the 30-day prevalence of “vaping” nicotine rose dramatically among 8th graders, 10th graders, 12th graders, college students, and young adults; the increase was the greatest among college students.1 As vaping has become a common phenomenon in our society, it is prudent to have a basic understanding of what vaping is, and its potential health risks.

How it works

Vaping is the inhaling and exhaling of aerosol that is produced by a device.2 Users can vape nicotine, tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), or synthetic drugs. The aerosol, often mistaken for water vapor, consists of fine particles that contain varying amounts of toxic chemicals and heavy metals that enter the lungs and bloodstream when vaping.2 In general, vaping devices consist of a mouthpiece, a battery, a cartridge for containing the e-juice/e-liquid, and a heating component that turns the e-juice/e-liquid into vapor.2 The e-juice/e-liquid usually contains a propylene glycol or vegetable glycerin-based liquid with nicotine, THC, or synthetic drugs.2 The e-juice/e-liquid also contains flavorings, additives, and other chemicals and metals (but not tobacco).2

There are 4 types of vaping devices3:

E-cigarettes. This first generation of vaping devices was introduced to US markets in 2007. E-cigarettes look similar to cigarettes and come in disposable or rechargeable forms.3 They may emit a light when the user puffs. E-cigarettes have shorter battery lives and are less expensive than other vaping devices.

Vape pens. These second-generation vaping devices resemble fountain pens. Vape pens also come in disposable and rechargeable forms.3 They can be refilled with e-juice/e-liquid.3

Vaping mods. These third-generation vaping devices were created when users modified items such as flashlights to create a more powerful vaping experience; however, these self-modifications often are unsafe. Vaping mods are larger than vape pens and e-cigarettes and include modification options. They also have large-capacity batteries that are replaceable. Vaping mods are typically rechargeable and deliver more nicotine than earlier-generation vaping devices.

Pod systems. Pod systems, such as Juul, are the latest generation of vaping devices. These small, sleek devices resemble a USB drive.3 They can be recharged on a laptop or any USB charger.3 Pods combine the portability of e-cigarettes or vape pens with the power of a mod system. There are 2 types of pod systems: open and closed. Open pod systems consist of removable pods that are filled with the user’s choice of e-juice/e-liquid and then replaced after being refilled several times. Closed pod systems are purchased pre-filled with e-juice/e-liquid and are disposable, similar to single-use coffee pods. Juul is the most popular vape brand in the United States.4 For a visual guide of the different vaping devices, see https://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/basic_information/e-cigarettes/pdfs/ecigarette-or-vaping-products-visual-dictionary-508.pdf
 

What are the risks?

Vaping is relatively new, so the long-term health effects are not well studied. Although less harmful than smoking cigarettes, vaping is still not safe because users are exposed to chemicals in the aerosol, such as nicotine, heavy metals such as lead, volatile organic compounds, and cancer-causing agents.3 Vaping nicotine can result in the same cardiac and pulmonary complications as smoking cigarettes. Vaping nicotine can also be more addictive than smoking cigarettes because users can buy cartridges with higher concentrations of nicotine or increase the vaping device’s voltage to get a greater “hit” of nicotine (or whatever substance the user is vaping.) Vaping devices can also cause unintentional injuries due to fires and explosions from defective batteries.3

Vaping—particularly vaping THC—has been linked to a condition called e-cigarette, or vaping, product use-associated lung injury (EVALI).5 As of February 18, 2020, the CDC had received reports of approximately 2,800 patients with EVALI who were hospitalized or had died.5 Most EVALI cases have been linked to e-cigarette or vaping products that contained THC, particularly products obtained from informal sources such as friends, family, or in-person or online dealers.5 Vitamin E acetate, an additive in some THC-containing vaping products, has been strongly linked to EVALI.5 When ingested as a vitamin supplement or applied to the skin, vitamin E usually is harmless, but when inhaled, it may interfere with normal lung functioning.5 The CDC recommends that individuals who vape do not use products that contain THC; avoid getting vaping products from informal sources, such as friends, family, or online dealers; and not modify or add any substances to a vaping device other than as intended by the manufacturer.5

 

References
  1. Schulenberg JE, Johnston LD, O’Malley PM, et al; the University of Michigan Institute for Social Research. Monitoring the Future national survey results on drug use, 1975-2018. Volume 2. College students and adults ages 19-60. Published July 2019. Accessed November 12, 2021. http://www.monitoringthefuture.org/pubs/monographs/mtf-vol2_2018.pdf
  2. Partnership to End Addiction. Vaping & e-cigarettes. Last updated May 2021. Accessed November 12, 2021. https://drugfree.org/drugs/e-cigarettes-vaping/
  3. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. About electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes). Last reviewed February 24, 2020. Accessed June 20, 2020. https://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/basic_information/e-cigarettes/about-e-cigarettes.html
  4. Partnership to End Addiction. What parents need to know about vaping. Published May 2020. Accessed October 27, 2021. https://drugfree.org/article/what-parents-need-to-know-about-vaping/
  5. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Outbreak of lung injury associated with the use of e-cigarette, or vaping, products. Last reviewed August 3, 2021. Accessed November 19, 2021. https://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/basic_information/e-cigarettes/severe-lung-disease.html#overview
References
  1. Schulenberg JE, Johnston LD, O’Malley PM, et al; the University of Michigan Institute for Social Research. Monitoring the Future national survey results on drug use, 1975-2018. Volume 2. College students and adults ages 19-60. Published July 2019. Accessed November 12, 2021. http://www.monitoringthefuture.org/pubs/monographs/mtf-vol2_2018.pdf
  2. Partnership to End Addiction. Vaping & e-cigarettes. Last updated May 2021. Accessed November 12, 2021. https://drugfree.org/drugs/e-cigarettes-vaping/
  3. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. About electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes). Last reviewed February 24, 2020. Accessed June 20, 2020. https://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/basic_information/e-cigarettes/about-e-cigarettes.html
  4. Partnership to End Addiction. What parents need to know about vaping. Published May 2020. Accessed October 27, 2021. https://drugfree.org/article/what-parents-need-to-know-about-vaping/
  5. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Outbreak of lung injury associated with the use of e-cigarette, or vaping, products. Last reviewed August 3, 2021. Accessed November 19, 2021. https://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/basic_information/e-cigarettes/severe-lung-disease.html#overview
Issue
Current Psychiatry - 20(12)
Issue
Current Psychiatry - 20(12)
Page Number
e5-e6
Page Number
e5-e6
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.
Conference Recap Checkbox
Not Conference Recap
Clinical Edge
Display the Slideshow in this Article
Medscape Article
Display survey writer
Reuters content
Disable Inline Native ads
WebMD Article
Article PDF Media

Service animals and emotional support animals: Should you write that letter?

Article Type
Changed
Tue, 12/07/2021 - 08:10

 

For centuries, animals, especially dogs, have assisted humans in a variety of ways in their daily lives. Animals that assist people with disabilities fall into 2 broad categories: disability service animals, and emotional support animals (ESAs). Often there is confusion in how these categories differ because of the animal’s role and the laws related to them.

This article describes the differences between disability service animals and ESAs, and outlines the forensic and ethical concerns you should consider before agreeing to write a letter for a patient outlining their need for a disability service animal or ESA. A letter may protect a patient and their service animal or ESA in situations where laws and regulations typically prohibit animals, such as on a flight or when renting an apartment or house. Note that a description of how to conduct the formal patient evaluation before writing a verification letter is beyond the scope of this article.

The differences between disability service animals and ESAs

Purpose and training. Disability service animals, or service animals, are dogs of any breed (and in some cases miniature horses) that are specially trained to perform tasks for an individual with a disability (physical, sensory, psychiatric, intellectual, or other mental disability).1-3 These tasks must be directly related to the individual’s disability.1,2 On the other hand, ESAs, which can be any species of animal, provide support and minimize the impact of an individual’s emotional or psychological disability based on their presence alone. Unlike disability service animals, ESAs are not trained to perform a specific task or duty.2,3

There is no legal requirement for service animals to know specific commands, and professional training is not required—individuals can train the animals themselves.1 Service animals, mainly dogs, can be trained to perform numerous tasks, including4:

  • attending to an individual’s mobility and activities of daily living
  • guiding an individual who is deaf or hearing impaired
  • helping to remind an individual to take their medications
  • assisting an individual during and/or after a seizure
  • alerting individuals with diabetes in advance of low or high blood sugar episodes
  • supporting an individual with autism
  • assisting an individual with a psychiatric or mental disability
  • applying sensory commands such as lying on the person or resting their head on the individual’s lap to help the individual regain behavioral control.

Service dog verification works via an honor system, which can be problematic, especially in the case of psychiatric service dogs, whose handlers may not have a visible disability (Box 11,5).
 

Box 1

Is it a service dog, or just a pet?

In the United States, there is no national service dog certification program—meaning there is no official test that a dog has to pass in order to obtain formal recognition as a service animal—nor is there a central and mandatory service dog registry.5 Instead, service dog verification works through an honor system, which can be problematic.5 In many states, misrepresenting one’s dog as a service dog is considered a misdemeanor.5 Unfortunately, other than the guidance set forth by the Americans with Disabilities Act, there are no criteria by which one can recognize a genuine service dog vs one being passed off as a service dog.5

In situations in public settings where it is not obvious or there’s doubt that the dog is a service animal (such as when a person visits a restaurant or store), employees are not allowed to request documentation for the dog, require the dog demonstrate its task, or inquire about the nature of the person’s disability.1

However, they can ask 2 questions1:

1. Is the animal required because of a disability?

2. What work or task has the animal been trained to perform?

Legal protections. Under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), individuals with disabilities can bring their service animals into buildings or facilities where members of the public, program participants, clients, customers, patrons, or invitees are allowed.2 This does not include private clubs, religious organizations, or places of worship that are not open to the public.6,7 ESAs do not qualify as service animals under the ADA and are not given the same legal accommodations as service animals.1,3 Although ESAs were initially covered by the Air Carrier Access Act, they are no longer allowed in aircraft cabins after the US Department of Transportation revised this Act’s regulations in December 2020. ESAs are covered under the Fair Housing Act. Box 21-3,6-15 further discusses these laws and protections.

Evidence. In 1998, Dogs for Good (formerly Dogs for the Disabled), an organization based in the United Kingdom, conducted a survey that assessed the satisfaction of owners who were provided with trained assistance dogs.16 The results suggested that service dogs improved their owners’ mobility and helped ease the completion of tasks, thereby helping their owners integrate further on a society level and gain a strong bond with their animal.16 Another survey compared quality of life scores of individuals who owned a service dog vs individuals who were eligible to receive a dog, but did not yet have one.17 It found that service animals were able to help their owners gain a greater degree of freedom and enhance their ability to participate in everyday outings or tasks that may otherwise have been a struggle, or impossible, if the owner were alone.17 In addition to boosting confidence, self-esteem, and improving social integration, service dogs have been shown to improve their owners’ quality of life.17

Due to the difficulty in reconciling inconsistent definitions for ESAs, there is limited high-quality data pertaining to the potential benefits and risks of ESAs.9 Currently, ESAs are not an evidence-based treatment for psychiatric disorders. To date, a handful of small studies have focused on ESAs. However, data from actual tests of the clinical risks and benefits of ESAs do not exist.9 In practice, ESAs are equivalent to pets. It stands to reason that similar to pets, ESAs could reduce loneliness, improve life satisfaction, and provide a sense of well-being.9 A systematic review suggested that pets provide benefits to patients with mental health conditions “through the intensity of connectivity with their owners and the contribution they make to emotional support in times of crises together with their ability to help manage symptoms when they arise.”18 In response to a congressional mandate, the US Department of Veterans Affairs launched a multi-site study from December 2014 to June 2019 to examine how limitations on activity and quality of life in veterans with posttraumatic stress disorder are impacted by the provision of a service dog vs an emotional support dog.19 As of October 14, 2021, results had not been published.19

 

Continue to: What’s in a disability service animal/ESA letter?

 

 

 

What’s in a disability service animal/ESA letter?

If you decide to write a letter advocating for your patient to have a service animal or ESA, the letter should appear on letterhead, be written by a licensed mental health professional, and include the following2,20:

  • statement that the letter is being written at the patient’s request and is being given directly to the patient for use as the patient sees fit
  • confirmation of the patient’s DSM-5 mental health diagnosis
  • explanation of how the animal helps alleviate symptoms of the patient’s condition, briefly describing any interaction(s) between the animal and patient that you may have observed, and if applicable, a mention of any training the animal may have received from a qualified trainer if applicable
  • explanation of the possible negative effects of the patient not having the animal with him or her
  • statement that you are not vouching for the animal’s behavior
  • verification of your involvement in your patient’s treatment and your assessment of the patient as their licensed mental health professional (including details such as date and type of license you have and the state/other jurisdiction where it was issued).

In a letter for a service animal, also indicate that your patient is psychiatrically disabled to the extent that your patient is not able to perform at least one major life task without the daily assistance of a service animal.2Should you write your patient a letter?

Writing a letter advocating for a patient to have a service animal or ESA may appear innocuous, but doing so may have serious ramifications. Writing a letter certifying a dog as a service animal does not make that animal a service animal; the dog must be specifically trained for a task or tasks directly related to that individual’s disability. There are no current standards for conducting evaluations to determine the need a patient has for a service animal or ESA. How to conduct such evaluations is beyond the scope of this article. There are meager opportunities for formal education and training on how to conduct these evaluations.9 Online resources may be incomplete or inaccurate, and this information is often produced by lay animal enthusiasts and organizations, which can lead to a biased depiction of these animals.9

If you decide to write a letter for your patient, consider the following forensic and ethical concerns.

Remain objective. As an advocate for your patient, you may find it difficult to remain neutral and objective when asked to determine if your patient has a disability, the severity of the disability, the impact of the disability on your patient’s life, and the need for a service animal or ESA. Ensure that your advocacy for your patient does not impair your objectivity; if that is difficult, consider referring your patient to a third party who can conduct an objective evaluation.

Understand the risks. If you make written recommendations for special accommodations in a letter and those recommendations are disputed by an agency, that agency could initiate legal action and you may be called to justify your recommendations in a deposition or open court.9,21 Before writing the letter, ask yourself, “Can I defend my determination that my patient is disabled by a DSM-5 disorder and that this disability requires the presence of an animal in exception to existing policy?”21 Be prepared to state in a legal proceeding that the presence of a service animal or ESA is necessary. If you are unwilling to risk exposure to a legal action, then you should likely refrain from writing the letter. It is a crime to fraudulently certify an animal as a service animal in some jurisdictions, and such conduct could result in disciplinary action by your licensing board.21

Conduct a systematic examination. When you write a letter for your patient, you are explicitly declaring your patient has a disability or condition. Comprehensive disability determinations are complex and are best conducted by assessing for objective evidence of psychiatric disorders and impairment through the use of standard, systematic examination methods.22 Unstandardized measures (eg, asking patients open-ended questions and then relying on your clinical judgement and interpretation in arriving at conclusions) are not as effective.22 In addition, consider the possibility that your patient may malinger their symptoms in an effort to obtain a letter supporting a service animal or ESA. Assessing for malingering is essential to making a disability determination, especially if a disability claim is based primarily on self-report.22

Anticipate pushback. Problems can arise when a patient wants a letter that you cannot or will not provide due to your scope of practice. Consider how you would resolve the situation when you do not believe your patient has a disability that requires the presence of a service animal or ESA—or you believe that your patient no longer needs a service animal or ESA—and the patient disagrees.21 Disagreeing with your patient’s assessment could result in a conflict of interest that could damage the therapeutic relationship.21

Box 2

Legal protections for service animals and emotional support animals

The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990, as amended by the ADA Amendments Act of 2008, prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability in several areas, including state and local governments (under Title II of the ADA) and places of public accommodations, commercial facilities, and private entities (under Title III of the ADA).6,7 Thus, individuals with disabilities can bring their service animals into the building or facility where members of the public, program participants, clients, customers, patrons, or invitees are allowed.2 This does not include private clubs not open to the public, religious organizations, or places of worship.6,7

Service animals. Although the ADA recognizes miniature horses as service animals, only dogs are recognized as service animals in regards to Title II and Title III protections under the ADA as of March 15, 2011.2 Federal agencies do not have to comply with the ADA1; however, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 is the federal law that protects the rights of people with disabilities to participate in federal programs and services.1,8 It states that no qualified individual with a disability shall be excluded from, denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity that receives federal funding or is conducted by federal agencies.8 Courts have strived to interpret the Rehabilitation Act and the ADA in a consistent manner, specifically applying the ADA regulations regarding service animals (including its narrow definition regarding specifically trained tasks and emotional support) to the Rehabilitation Act.9-11

Similarly, commercial airlines do not have to comply with the ADA1 ; however, the Air Carrier Access Act (ACAA) of 1986 is the federal law that protects the rights of people with disabilities in air travel.1,12 On December 2, 2020, the US Department of Transportation announced that it was revising its ACAA regulation regarding service animals on aircraft (this final rule will be effective 30 days after date of publication in the Federal Register).13 Among the many revisions, the US Department of Transportation narrowed the definition of service animals to only dogs that were individually trained to work or perform tasks for the benefits of a person with a disability.13 It requires airlines to treat psychiatric service animals the same as other service animals.13 Although the US Department of Transportation has chosen to closely align its ACAA service animal definition with US Department of Justice service animal definition under the ADA, the substantive requirements in this final rule differ from US Department of Justice’s requirements for service animals under the ADA in various areas (for example, by allowing airlines to require service animal documentation and prohibiting the use of voice control over a service animal).13

Emotional support animals. Regulations regarding ESAs are primarily set by individual states1,3; however, ESAs may qualify for a waiver of a no-pet rule or a pet deposit under the Fair Housing Amendments Act (FHAA) of 1988.2,14 Under the FHAA, if an individual has a disability, as defined by the ADA, that requires the presence of an ESA, or if they have symptoms that are ameliorated by the presence of an ESA, the landlord must comply with this request and allow the animal into the facility without charging pet fees.15

Bottom Line 

Disability service animals and emotional support animals (ESAs) differ in their roles and legal protections. Before writing a letter in support of a patient’s request for a service animal or ESA, take into account the forensic and ethical implications of doing so.

 

Related Resources

  • US Department of Justice. Civil Rights Division. Disability Rights Section. ADA requirements. Service animals. Updated February 24, 2020. https://www.ada.gov/service_ animals_2010.htm
  • American Veterinary Medical Association. Service, emotional support and therapy animals. https://www. avma.org/resources-tools/animal-health-welfare/ service-emotional-support-and-therapy-animals

  • US Department of Transportation. US Department of Transportation announces final rule on traveling by air with service animals. https://www.transportation.gov/briefingroom/us-department-transportation-announces-finalrule-traveling-air-service-animals

References

1. US Department of Justice. Frequently asked questions about service animals and the ADA. Published July 20, 2015. Accessed on July 28, 2021. https://www.ada.gov/regs2010/service_animal_qa.pdf

2. ADA National Network. Service animals and emotional support animals: where are they allowed and under what conditions? Published 2014. Accessed July 28, 2021. https://adata.org/sites/adata.org/files/files/Service_Animal_Booklet_2014(2).pdf

3. Huben-Kearney A. What to do if patients want service or emotional support animals. Psychiatric News. Published September 28, 2020. Accessed July 28, 2021. https://psychnews.psychiatryonline.org/doi/10.1176/appi.pn.2020.10a24

4. Fine AH. The role of therapy and service animals in the lives of persons with disabilities. Rev Sci Tech. 2018;37(1):141-149.

5. Wlodarczyk J. When pigs fly: emotional support animals, service dogs and the politics of legitimacy across species boundaries. Med Humanit. 2019;45(1):82-91.

6. Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990. Pub L. 101-336, 104 Stat. 327.

7. ADA Amendments Act of 2008. Pub L. 110-325.

8. Rehabilitation Act of 1973. Pub L. 93-112, 87 Stat 355.

9. Carroll JD, Mohlenhoff BS, Kersten CM, et al. Laws and ethics related to emotional support animals. J Am Acad Psychiatry Law. 2020;48(4):509-518.

10. Sanchez v US Dept of Energy. 870 F3d 1185 (10th Circuit 2017).

11. Berardelli v Allied Services Inst. of Rehab. Med., 900 F3d 104 (3rd Circuit 2018).

12. Air Carrier Access Act of 1986. 49 USC §41705.

13. US Department of Transportation. US Department of Transportation announces final rule on traveling by air with service animals. Published December 2, 2020. Accessed July 28, 2021. https://www.transportation.gov/briefing-room/us-department-transportation-announces-final-rule-traveling-air-service-animals

14. Fair Housing Amendments Act of 1988. Pub. L. 100-430. https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/STATUTE-102/pdf/STATUTE-102-Pg1619.pdf

15. Boness CL, Younggren JN, Frumkin IB. The certification of emotional support animals: difference between clinical and forensic mental health practitioners. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice. 2017;48(3):216-223.

16. Lane DR, McNicholas J, Collis GM. Dogs for the disabled: benefits to recipients and welfare of the dog. Applied Animal Behaviour Science. 1998;59(1-3):49-60.

17. Hall SS, MacMichael J, Turner A, et al. A survey of the impact of owning a service dog on quality of life for individuals with physical and hearing disability: a pilot study. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2017;15(1):59. doi:10.1186/s12955-017-0640-x

18. Brooks HL, Rushton K, Lovell K, et al. The power of support from companion animals for people living with mental health problems: a systematic review and narrative synthesis of the evidence. BMC Psychiatry. 2018;18(1):31. doi: 10.1186/s12888-018-1613-2

19. US National Library of Medicine: ClinicalTrials.gov. Can service dogs improve activity and quality of life in veterans with PTSD? (SDPTSD). Updated August 15, 2019. Accessed October 14, 2021. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/study/NCT02039843

20. Clay RA. Is that a pet or therapeutic aid? American Psychological Association. 2016;47(8):38. https://www.apa.org/monitor/2016/09/pet-aid

21. Younggren JN, Boisvert JA, Boness CL. Examining emotional support animals and role conflicts in professional psychology. Prof Psychol Res Pr. 2016;47(4):255-260.

22. Gold LH, Anfang SA, Drukteinis AM, et al. AAPL practice guideline for the forensic evaluation of psychiatric disability. J Am Acad Psychiatry Law. 2008;36(4 Suppl):S3-S50. https://www.aapl.org/docs/pdf/Evaluation%20of%20Psychiatric%20Disability.pdf

Article PDF
Author and Disclosure Information

Kaustubh G. Joshi, MD

Associate Professor of Clinical Psychiatry
Associate Director, Forensic Psychiatry Fellowship
Department of Neuropsychiatry and Behavioral Science
University of South Carolina School of Medicine
Columbia, South Carolina

Disclosure

The author reports no financial relationships with any companies whose products are mentioned in this article, or with manufacturers of competing products.

Issue
Current Psychiatry - 20(11)
Publications
Topics
Page Number
16-19, 24
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

Kaustubh G. Joshi, MD

Associate Professor of Clinical Psychiatry
Associate Director, Forensic Psychiatry Fellowship
Department of Neuropsychiatry and Behavioral Science
University of South Carolina School of Medicine
Columbia, South Carolina

Disclosure

The author reports no financial relationships with any companies whose products are mentioned in this article, or with manufacturers of competing products.

Author and Disclosure Information

Kaustubh G. Joshi, MD

Associate Professor of Clinical Psychiatry
Associate Director, Forensic Psychiatry Fellowship
Department of Neuropsychiatry and Behavioral Science
University of South Carolina School of Medicine
Columbia, South Carolina

Disclosure

The author reports no financial relationships with any companies whose products are mentioned in this article, or with manufacturers of competing products.

Article PDF
Article PDF

 

For centuries, animals, especially dogs, have assisted humans in a variety of ways in their daily lives. Animals that assist people with disabilities fall into 2 broad categories: disability service animals, and emotional support animals (ESAs). Often there is confusion in how these categories differ because of the animal’s role and the laws related to them.

This article describes the differences between disability service animals and ESAs, and outlines the forensic and ethical concerns you should consider before agreeing to write a letter for a patient outlining their need for a disability service animal or ESA. A letter may protect a patient and their service animal or ESA in situations where laws and regulations typically prohibit animals, such as on a flight or when renting an apartment or house. Note that a description of how to conduct the formal patient evaluation before writing a verification letter is beyond the scope of this article.

The differences between disability service animals and ESAs

Purpose and training. Disability service animals, or service animals, are dogs of any breed (and in some cases miniature horses) that are specially trained to perform tasks for an individual with a disability (physical, sensory, psychiatric, intellectual, or other mental disability).1-3 These tasks must be directly related to the individual’s disability.1,2 On the other hand, ESAs, which can be any species of animal, provide support and minimize the impact of an individual’s emotional or psychological disability based on their presence alone. Unlike disability service animals, ESAs are not trained to perform a specific task or duty.2,3

There is no legal requirement for service animals to know specific commands, and professional training is not required—individuals can train the animals themselves.1 Service animals, mainly dogs, can be trained to perform numerous tasks, including4:

  • attending to an individual’s mobility and activities of daily living
  • guiding an individual who is deaf or hearing impaired
  • helping to remind an individual to take their medications
  • assisting an individual during and/or after a seizure
  • alerting individuals with diabetes in advance of low or high blood sugar episodes
  • supporting an individual with autism
  • assisting an individual with a psychiatric or mental disability
  • applying sensory commands such as lying on the person or resting their head on the individual’s lap to help the individual regain behavioral control.

Service dog verification works via an honor system, which can be problematic, especially in the case of psychiatric service dogs, whose handlers may not have a visible disability (Box 11,5).
 

Box 1

Is it a service dog, or just a pet?

In the United States, there is no national service dog certification program—meaning there is no official test that a dog has to pass in order to obtain formal recognition as a service animal—nor is there a central and mandatory service dog registry.5 Instead, service dog verification works through an honor system, which can be problematic.5 In many states, misrepresenting one’s dog as a service dog is considered a misdemeanor.5 Unfortunately, other than the guidance set forth by the Americans with Disabilities Act, there are no criteria by which one can recognize a genuine service dog vs one being passed off as a service dog.5

In situations in public settings where it is not obvious or there’s doubt that the dog is a service animal (such as when a person visits a restaurant or store), employees are not allowed to request documentation for the dog, require the dog demonstrate its task, or inquire about the nature of the person’s disability.1

However, they can ask 2 questions1:

1. Is the animal required because of a disability?

2. What work or task has the animal been trained to perform?

Legal protections. Under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), individuals with disabilities can bring their service animals into buildings or facilities where members of the public, program participants, clients, customers, patrons, or invitees are allowed.2 This does not include private clubs, religious organizations, or places of worship that are not open to the public.6,7 ESAs do not qualify as service animals under the ADA and are not given the same legal accommodations as service animals.1,3 Although ESAs were initially covered by the Air Carrier Access Act, they are no longer allowed in aircraft cabins after the US Department of Transportation revised this Act’s regulations in December 2020. ESAs are covered under the Fair Housing Act. Box 21-3,6-15 further discusses these laws and protections.

Evidence. In 1998, Dogs for Good (formerly Dogs for the Disabled), an organization based in the United Kingdom, conducted a survey that assessed the satisfaction of owners who were provided with trained assistance dogs.16 The results suggested that service dogs improved their owners’ mobility and helped ease the completion of tasks, thereby helping their owners integrate further on a society level and gain a strong bond with their animal.16 Another survey compared quality of life scores of individuals who owned a service dog vs individuals who were eligible to receive a dog, but did not yet have one.17 It found that service animals were able to help their owners gain a greater degree of freedom and enhance their ability to participate in everyday outings or tasks that may otherwise have been a struggle, or impossible, if the owner were alone.17 In addition to boosting confidence, self-esteem, and improving social integration, service dogs have been shown to improve their owners’ quality of life.17

Due to the difficulty in reconciling inconsistent definitions for ESAs, there is limited high-quality data pertaining to the potential benefits and risks of ESAs.9 Currently, ESAs are not an evidence-based treatment for psychiatric disorders. To date, a handful of small studies have focused on ESAs. However, data from actual tests of the clinical risks and benefits of ESAs do not exist.9 In practice, ESAs are equivalent to pets. It stands to reason that similar to pets, ESAs could reduce loneliness, improve life satisfaction, and provide a sense of well-being.9 A systematic review suggested that pets provide benefits to patients with mental health conditions “through the intensity of connectivity with their owners and the contribution they make to emotional support in times of crises together with their ability to help manage symptoms when they arise.”18 In response to a congressional mandate, the US Department of Veterans Affairs launched a multi-site study from December 2014 to June 2019 to examine how limitations on activity and quality of life in veterans with posttraumatic stress disorder are impacted by the provision of a service dog vs an emotional support dog.19 As of October 14, 2021, results had not been published.19

 

Continue to: What’s in a disability service animal/ESA letter?

 

 

 

What’s in a disability service animal/ESA letter?

If you decide to write a letter advocating for your patient to have a service animal or ESA, the letter should appear on letterhead, be written by a licensed mental health professional, and include the following2,20:

  • statement that the letter is being written at the patient’s request and is being given directly to the patient for use as the patient sees fit
  • confirmation of the patient’s DSM-5 mental health diagnosis
  • explanation of how the animal helps alleviate symptoms of the patient’s condition, briefly describing any interaction(s) between the animal and patient that you may have observed, and if applicable, a mention of any training the animal may have received from a qualified trainer if applicable
  • explanation of the possible negative effects of the patient not having the animal with him or her
  • statement that you are not vouching for the animal’s behavior
  • verification of your involvement in your patient’s treatment and your assessment of the patient as their licensed mental health professional (including details such as date and type of license you have and the state/other jurisdiction where it was issued).

In a letter for a service animal, also indicate that your patient is psychiatrically disabled to the extent that your patient is not able to perform at least one major life task without the daily assistance of a service animal.2Should you write your patient a letter?

Writing a letter advocating for a patient to have a service animal or ESA may appear innocuous, but doing so may have serious ramifications. Writing a letter certifying a dog as a service animal does not make that animal a service animal; the dog must be specifically trained for a task or tasks directly related to that individual’s disability. There are no current standards for conducting evaluations to determine the need a patient has for a service animal or ESA. How to conduct such evaluations is beyond the scope of this article. There are meager opportunities for formal education and training on how to conduct these evaluations.9 Online resources may be incomplete or inaccurate, and this information is often produced by lay animal enthusiasts and organizations, which can lead to a biased depiction of these animals.9

If you decide to write a letter for your patient, consider the following forensic and ethical concerns.

Remain objective. As an advocate for your patient, you may find it difficult to remain neutral and objective when asked to determine if your patient has a disability, the severity of the disability, the impact of the disability on your patient’s life, and the need for a service animal or ESA. Ensure that your advocacy for your patient does not impair your objectivity; if that is difficult, consider referring your patient to a third party who can conduct an objective evaluation.

Understand the risks. If you make written recommendations for special accommodations in a letter and those recommendations are disputed by an agency, that agency could initiate legal action and you may be called to justify your recommendations in a deposition or open court.9,21 Before writing the letter, ask yourself, “Can I defend my determination that my patient is disabled by a DSM-5 disorder and that this disability requires the presence of an animal in exception to existing policy?”21 Be prepared to state in a legal proceeding that the presence of a service animal or ESA is necessary. If you are unwilling to risk exposure to a legal action, then you should likely refrain from writing the letter. It is a crime to fraudulently certify an animal as a service animal in some jurisdictions, and such conduct could result in disciplinary action by your licensing board.21

Conduct a systematic examination. When you write a letter for your patient, you are explicitly declaring your patient has a disability or condition. Comprehensive disability determinations are complex and are best conducted by assessing for objective evidence of psychiatric disorders and impairment through the use of standard, systematic examination methods.22 Unstandardized measures (eg, asking patients open-ended questions and then relying on your clinical judgement and interpretation in arriving at conclusions) are not as effective.22 In addition, consider the possibility that your patient may malinger their symptoms in an effort to obtain a letter supporting a service animal or ESA. Assessing for malingering is essential to making a disability determination, especially if a disability claim is based primarily on self-report.22

Anticipate pushback. Problems can arise when a patient wants a letter that you cannot or will not provide due to your scope of practice. Consider how you would resolve the situation when you do not believe your patient has a disability that requires the presence of a service animal or ESA—or you believe that your patient no longer needs a service animal or ESA—and the patient disagrees.21 Disagreeing with your patient’s assessment could result in a conflict of interest that could damage the therapeutic relationship.21

Box 2

Legal protections for service animals and emotional support animals

The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990, as amended by the ADA Amendments Act of 2008, prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability in several areas, including state and local governments (under Title II of the ADA) and places of public accommodations, commercial facilities, and private entities (under Title III of the ADA).6,7 Thus, individuals with disabilities can bring their service animals into the building or facility where members of the public, program participants, clients, customers, patrons, or invitees are allowed.2 This does not include private clubs not open to the public, religious organizations, or places of worship.6,7

Service animals. Although the ADA recognizes miniature horses as service animals, only dogs are recognized as service animals in regards to Title II and Title III protections under the ADA as of March 15, 2011.2 Federal agencies do not have to comply with the ADA1; however, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 is the federal law that protects the rights of people with disabilities to participate in federal programs and services.1,8 It states that no qualified individual with a disability shall be excluded from, denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity that receives federal funding or is conducted by federal agencies.8 Courts have strived to interpret the Rehabilitation Act and the ADA in a consistent manner, specifically applying the ADA regulations regarding service animals (including its narrow definition regarding specifically trained tasks and emotional support) to the Rehabilitation Act.9-11

Similarly, commercial airlines do not have to comply with the ADA1 ; however, the Air Carrier Access Act (ACAA) of 1986 is the federal law that protects the rights of people with disabilities in air travel.1,12 On December 2, 2020, the US Department of Transportation announced that it was revising its ACAA regulation regarding service animals on aircraft (this final rule will be effective 30 days after date of publication in the Federal Register).13 Among the many revisions, the US Department of Transportation narrowed the definition of service animals to only dogs that were individually trained to work or perform tasks for the benefits of a person with a disability.13 It requires airlines to treat psychiatric service animals the same as other service animals.13 Although the US Department of Transportation has chosen to closely align its ACAA service animal definition with US Department of Justice service animal definition under the ADA, the substantive requirements in this final rule differ from US Department of Justice’s requirements for service animals under the ADA in various areas (for example, by allowing airlines to require service animal documentation and prohibiting the use of voice control over a service animal).13

Emotional support animals. Regulations regarding ESAs are primarily set by individual states1,3; however, ESAs may qualify for a waiver of a no-pet rule or a pet deposit under the Fair Housing Amendments Act (FHAA) of 1988.2,14 Under the FHAA, if an individual has a disability, as defined by the ADA, that requires the presence of an ESA, or if they have symptoms that are ameliorated by the presence of an ESA, the landlord must comply with this request and allow the animal into the facility without charging pet fees.15

Bottom Line 

Disability service animals and emotional support animals (ESAs) differ in their roles and legal protections. Before writing a letter in support of a patient’s request for a service animal or ESA, take into account the forensic and ethical implications of doing so.

 

Related Resources

  • US Department of Justice. Civil Rights Division. Disability Rights Section. ADA requirements. Service animals. Updated February 24, 2020. https://www.ada.gov/service_ animals_2010.htm
  • American Veterinary Medical Association. Service, emotional support and therapy animals. https://www. avma.org/resources-tools/animal-health-welfare/ service-emotional-support-and-therapy-animals

  • US Department of Transportation. US Department of Transportation announces final rule on traveling by air with service animals. https://www.transportation.gov/briefingroom/us-department-transportation-announces-finalrule-traveling-air-service-animals

 

For centuries, animals, especially dogs, have assisted humans in a variety of ways in their daily lives. Animals that assist people with disabilities fall into 2 broad categories: disability service animals, and emotional support animals (ESAs). Often there is confusion in how these categories differ because of the animal’s role and the laws related to them.

This article describes the differences between disability service animals and ESAs, and outlines the forensic and ethical concerns you should consider before agreeing to write a letter for a patient outlining their need for a disability service animal or ESA. A letter may protect a patient and their service animal or ESA in situations where laws and regulations typically prohibit animals, such as on a flight or when renting an apartment or house. Note that a description of how to conduct the formal patient evaluation before writing a verification letter is beyond the scope of this article.

The differences between disability service animals and ESAs

Purpose and training. Disability service animals, or service animals, are dogs of any breed (and in some cases miniature horses) that are specially trained to perform tasks for an individual with a disability (physical, sensory, psychiatric, intellectual, or other mental disability).1-3 These tasks must be directly related to the individual’s disability.1,2 On the other hand, ESAs, which can be any species of animal, provide support and minimize the impact of an individual’s emotional or psychological disability based on their presence alone. Unlike disability service animals, ESAs are not trained to perform a specific task or duty.2,3

There is no legal requirement for service animals to know specific commands, and professional training is not required—individuals can train the animals themselves.1 Service animals, mainly dogs, can be trained to perform numerous tasks, including4:

  • attending to an individual’s mobility and activities of daily living
  • guiding an individual who is deaf or hearing impaired
  • helping to remind an individual to take their medications
  • assisting an individual during and/or after a seizure
  • alerting individuals with diabetes in advance of low or high blood sugar episodes
  • supporting an individual with autism
  • assisting an individual with a psychiatric or mental disability
  • applying sensory commands such as lying on the person or resting their head on the individual’s lap to help the individual regain behavioral control.

Service dog verification works via an honor system, which can be problematic, especially in the case of psychiatric service dogs, whose handlers may not have a visible disability (Box 11,5).
 

Box 1

Is it a service dog, or just a pet?

In the United States, there is no national service dog certification program—meaning there is no official test that a dog has to pass in order to obtain formal recognition as a service animal—nor is there a central and mandatory service dog registry.5 Instead, service dog verification works through an honor system, which can be problematic.5 In many states, misrepresenting one’s dog as a service dog is considered a misdemeanor.5 Unfortunately, other than the guidance set forth by the Americans with Disabilities Act, there are no criteria by which one can recognize a genuine service dog vs one being passed off as a service dog.5

In situations in public settings where it is not obvious or there’s doubt that the dog is a service animal (such as when a person visits a restaurant or store), employees are not allowed to request documentation for the dog, require the dog demonstrate its task, or inquire about the nature of the person’s disability.1

However, they can ask 2 questions1:

1. Is the animal required because of a disability?

2. What work or task has the animal been trained to perform?

Legal protections. Under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), individuals with disabilities can bring their service animals into buildings or facilities where members of the public, program participants, clients, customers, patrons, or invitees are allowed.2 This does not include private clubs, religious organizations, or places of worship that are not open to the public.6,7 ESAs do not qualify as service animals under the ADA and are not given the same legal accommodations as service animals.1,3 Although ESAs were initially covered by the Air Carrier Access Act, they are no longer allowed in aircraft cabins after the US Department of Transportation revised this Act’s regulations in December 2020. ESAs are covered under the Fair Housing Act. Box 21-3,6-15 further discusses these laws and protections.

Evidence. In 1998, Dogs for Good (formerly Dogs for the Disabled), an organization based in the United Kingdom, conducted a survey that assessed the satisfaction of owners who were provided with trained assistance dogs.16 The results suggested that service dogs improved their owners’ mobility and helped ease the completion of tasks, thereby helping their owners integrate further on a society level and gain a strong bond with their animal.16 Another survey compared quality of life scores of individuals who owned a service dog vs individuals who were eligible to receive a dog, but did not yet have one.17 It found that service animals were able to help their owners gain a greater degree of freedom and enhance their ability to participate in everyday outings or tasks that may otherwise have been a struggle, or impossible, if the owner were alone.17 In addition to boosting confidence, self-esteem, and improving social integration, service dogs have been shown to improve their owners’ quality of life.17

Due to the difficulty in reconciling inconsistent definitions for ESAs, there is limited high-quality data pertaining to the potential benefits and risks of ESAs.9 Currently, ESAs are not an evidence-based treatment for psychiatric disorders. To date, a handful of small studies have focused on ESAs. However, data from actual tests of the clinical risks and benefits of ESAs do not exist.9 In practice, ESAs are equivalent to pets. It stands to reason that similar to pets, ESAs could reduce loneliness, improve life satisfaction, and provide a sense of well-being.9 A systematic review suggested that pets provide benefits to patients with mental health conditions “through the intensity of connectivity with their owners and the contribution they make to emotional support in times of crises together with their ability to help manage symptoms when they arise.”18 In response to a congressional mandate, the US Department of Veterans Affairs launched a multi-site study from December 2014 to June 2019 to examine how limitations on activity and quality of life in veterans with posttraumatic stress disorder are impacted by the provision of a service dog vs an emotional support dog.19 As of October 14, 2021, results had not been published.19

 

Continue to: What’s in a disability service animal/ESA letter?

 

 

 

What’s in a disability service animal/ESA letter?

If you decide to write a letter advocating for your patient to have a service animal or ESA, the letter should appear on letterhead, be written by a licensed mental health professional, and include the following2,20:

  • statement that the letter is being written at the patient’s request and is being given directly to the patient for use as the patient sees fit
  • confirmation of the patient’s DSM-5 mental health diagnosis
  • explanation of how the animal helps alleviate symptoms of the patient’s condition, briefly describing any interaction(s) between the animal and patient that you may have observed, and if applicable, a mention of any training the animal may have received from a qualified trainer if applicable
  • explanation of the possible negative effects of the patient not having the animal with him or her
  • statement that you are not vouching for the animal’s behavior
  • verification of your involvement in your patient’s treatment and your assessment of the patient as their licensed mental health professional (including details such as date and type of license you have and the state/other jurisdiction where it was issued).

In a letter for a service animal, also indicate that your patient is psychiatrically disabled to the extent that your patient is not able to perform at least one major life task without the daily assistance of a service animal.2Should you write your patient a letter?

Writing a letter advocating for a patient to have a service animal or ESA may appear innocuous, but doing so may have serious ramifications. Writing a letter certifying a dog as a service animal does not make that animal a service animal; the dog must be specifically trained for a task or tasks directly related to that individual’s disability. There are no current standards for conducting evaluations to determine the need a patient has for a service animal or ESA. How to conduct such evaluations is beyond the scope of this article. There are meager opportunities for formal education and training on how to conduct these evaluations.9 Online resources may be incomplete or inaccurate, and this information is often produced by lay animal enthusiasts and organizations, which can lead to a biased depiction of these animals.9

If you decide to write a letter for your patient, consider the following forensic and ethical concerns.

Remain objective. As an advocate for your patient, you may find it difficult to remain neutral and objective when asked to determine if your patient has a disability, the severity of the disability, the impact of the disability on your patient’s life, and the need for a service animal or ESA. Ensure that your advocacy for your patient does not impair your objectivity; if that is difficult, consider referring your patient to a third party who can conduct an objective evaluation.

Understand the risks. If you make written recommendations for special accommodations in a letter and those recommendations are disputed by an agency, that agency could initiate legal action and you may be called to justify your recommendations in a deposition or open court.9,21 Before writing the letter, ask yourself, “Can I defend my determination that my patient is disabled by a DSM-5 disorder and that this disability requires the presence of an animal in exception to existing policy?”21 Be prepared to state in a legal proceeding that the presence of a service animal or ESA is necessary. If you are unwilling to risk exposure to a legal action, then you should likely refrain from writing the letter. It is a crime to fraudulently certify an animal as a service animal in some jurisdictions, and such conduct could result in disciplinary action by your licensing board.21

Conduct a systematic examination. When you write a letter for your patient, you are explicitly declaring your patient has a disability or condition. Comprehensive disability determinations are complex and are best conducted by assessing for objective evidence of psychiatric disorders and impairment through the use of standard, systematic examination methods.22 Unstandardized measures (eg, asking patients open-ended questions and then relying on your clinical judgement and interpretation in arriving at conclusions) are not as effective.22 In addition, consider the possibility that your patient may malinger their symptoms in an effort to obtain a letter supporting a service animal or ESA. Assessing for malingering is essential to making a disability determination, especially if a disability claim is based primarily on self-report.22

Anticipate pushback. Problems can arise when a patient wants a letter that you cannot or will not provide due to your scope of practice. Consider how you would resolve the situation when you do not believe your patient has a disability that requires the presence of a service animal or ESA—or you believe that your patient no longer needs a service animal or ESA—and the patient disagrees.21 Disagreeing with your patient’s assessment could result in a conflict of interest that could damage the therapeutic relationship.21

Box 2

Legal protections for service animals and emotional support animals

The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990, as amended by the ADA Amendments Act of 2008, prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability in several areas, including state and local governments (under Title II of the ADA) and places of public accommodations, commercial facilities, and private entities (under Title III of the ADA).6,7 Thus, individuals with disabilities can bring their service animals into the building or facility where members of the public, program participants, clients, customers, patrons, or invitees are allowed.2 This does not include private clubs not open to the public, religious organizations, or places of worship.6,7

Service animals. Although the ADA recognizes miniature horses as service animals, only dogs are recognized as service animals in regards to Title II and Title III protections under the ADA as of March 15, 2011.2 Federal agencies do not have to comply with the ADA1; however, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 is the federal law that protects the rights of people with disabilities to participate in federal programs and services.1,8 It states that no qualified individual with a disability shall be excluded from, denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity that receives federal funding or is conducted by federal agencies.8 Courts have strived to interpret the Rehabilitation Act and the ADA in a consistent manner, specifically applying the ADA regulations regarding service animals (including its narrow definition regarding specifically trained tasks and emotional support) to the Rehabilitation Act.9-11

Similarly, commercial airlines do not have to comply with the ADA1 ; however, the Air Carrier Access Act (ACAA) of 1986 is the federal law that protects the rights of people with disabilities in air travel.1,12 On December 2, 2020, the US Department of Transportation announced that it was revising its ACAA regulation regarding service animals on aircraft (this final rule will be effective 30 days after date of publication in the Federal Register).13 Among the many revisions, the US Department of Transportation narrowed the definition of service animals to only dogs that were individually trained to work or perform tasks for the benefits of a person with a disability.13 It requires airlines to treat psychiatric service animals the same as other service animals.13 Although the US Department of Transportation has chosen to closely align its ACAA service animal definition with US Department of Justice service animal definition under the ADA, the substantive requirements in this final rule differ from US Department of Justice’s requirements for service animals under the ADA in various areas (for example, by allowing airlines to require service animal documentation and prohibiting the use of voice control over a service animal).13

Emotional support animals. Regulations regarding ESAs are primarily set by individual states1,3; however, ESAs may qualify for a waiver of a no-pet rule or a pet deposit under the Fair Housing Amendments Act (FHAA) of 1988.2,14 Under the FHAA, if an individual has a disability, as defined by the ADA, that requires the presence of an ESA, or if they have symptoms that are ameliorated by the presence of an ESA, the landlord must comply with this request and allow the animal into the facility without charging pet fees.15

Bottom Line 

Disability service animals and emotional support animals (ESAs) differ in their roles and legal protections. Before writing a letter in support of a patient’s request for a service animal or ESA, take into account the forensic and ethical implications of doing so.

 

Related Resources

  • US Department of Justice. Civil Rights Division. Disability Rights Section. ADA requirements. Service animals. Updated February 24, 2020. https://www.ada.gov/service_ animals_2010.htm
  • American Veterinary Medical Association. Service, emotional support and therapy animals. https://www. avma.org/resources-tools/animal-health-welfare/ service-emotional-support-and-therapy-animals

  • US Department of Transportation. US Department of Transportation announces final rule on traveling by air with service animals. https://www.transportation.gov/briefingroom/us-department-transportation-announces-finalrule-traveling-air-service-animals

References

1. US Department of Justice. Frequently asked questions about service animals and the ADA. Published July 20, 2015. Accessed on July 28, 2021. https://www.ada.gov/regs2010/service_animal_qa.pdf

2. ADA National Network. Service animals and emotional support animals: where are they allowed and under what conditions? Published 2014. Accessed July 28, 2021. https://adata.org/sites/adata.org/files/files/Service_Animal_Booklet_2014(2).pdf

3. Huben-Kearney A. What to do if patients want service or emotional support animals. Psychiatric News. Published September 28, 2020. Accessed July 28, 2021. https://psychnews.psychiatryonline.org/doi/10.1176/appi.pn.2020.10a24

4. Fine AH. The role of therapy and service animals in the lives of persons with disabilities. Rev Sci Tech. 2018;37(1):141-149.

5. Wlodarczyk J. When pigs fly: emotional support animals, service dogs and the politics of legitimacy across species boundaries. Med Humanit. 2019;45(1):82-91.

6. Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990. Pub L. 101-336, 104 Stat. 327.

7. ADA Amendments Act of 2008. Pub L. 110-325.

8. Rehabilitation Act of 1973. Pub L. 93-112, 87 Stat 355.

9. Carroll JD, Mohlenhoff BS, Kersten CM, et al. Laws and ethics related to emotional support animals. J Am Acad Psychiatry Law. 2020;48(4):509-518.

10. Sanchez v US Dept of Energy. 870 F3d 1185 (10th Circuit 2017).

11. Berardelli v Allied Services Inst. of Rehab. Med., 900 F3d 104 (3rd Circuit 2018).

12. Air Carrier Access Act of 1986. 49 USC §41705.

13. US Department of Transportation. US Department of Transportation announces final rule on traveling by air with service animals. Published December 2, 2020. Accessed July 28, 2021. https://www.transportation.gov/briefing-room/us-department-transportation-announces-final-rule-traveling-air-service-animals

14. Fair Housing Amendments Act of 1988. Pub. L. 100-430. https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/STATUTE-102/pdf/STATUTE-102-Pg1619.pdf

15. Boness CL, Younggren JN, Frumkin IB. The certification of emotional support animals: difference between clinical and forensic mental health practitioners. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice. 2017;48(3):216-223.

16. Lane DR, McNicholas J, Collis GM. Dogs for the disabled: benefits to recipients and welfare of the dog. Applied Animal Behaviour Science. 1998;59(1-3):49-60.

17. Hall SS, MacMichael J, Turner A, et al. A survey of the impact of owning a service dog on quality of life for individuals with physical and hearing disability: a pilot study. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2017;15(1):59. doi:10.1186/s12955-017-0640-x

18. Brooks HL, Rushton K, Lovell K, et al. The power of support from companion animals for people living with mental health problems: a systematic review and narrative synthesis of the evidence. BMC Psychiatry. 2018;18(1):31. doi: 10.1186/s12888-018-1613-2

19. US National Library of Medicine: ClinicalTrials.gov. Can service dogs improve activity and quality of life in veterans with PTSD? (SDPTSD). Updated August 15, 2019. Accessed October 14, 2021. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/study/NCT02039843

20. Clay RA. Is that a pet or therapeutic aid? American Psychological Association. 2016;47(8):38. https://www.apa.org/monitor/2016/09/pet-aid

21. Younggren JN, Boisvert JA, Boness CL. Examining emotional support animals and role conflicts in professional psychology. Prof Psychol Res Pr. 2016;47(4):255-260.

22. Gold LH, Anfang SA, Drukteinis AM, et al. AAPL practice guideline for the forensic evaluation of psychiatric disability. J Am Acad Psychiatry Law. 2008;36(4 Suppl):S3-S50. https://www.aapl.org/docs/pdf/Evaluation%20of%20Psychiatric%20Disability.pdf

References

1. US Department of Justice. Frequently asked questions about service animals and the ADA. Published July 20, 2015. Accessed on July 28, 2021. https://www.ada.gov/regs2010/service_animal_qa.pdf

2. ADA National Network. Service animals and emotional support animals: where are they allowed and under what conditions? Published 2014. Accessed July 28, 2021. https://adata.org/sites/adata.org/files/files/Service_Animal_Booklet_2014(2).pdf

3. Huben-Kearney A. What to do if patients want service or emotional support animals. Psychiatric News. Published September 28, 2020. Accessed July 28, 2021. https://psychnews.psychiatryonline.org/doi/10.1176/appi.pn.2020.10a24

4. Fine AH. The role of therapy and service animals in the lives of persons with disabilities. Rev Sci Tech. 2018;37(1):141-149.

5. Wlodarczyk J. When pigs fly: emotional support animals, service dogs and the politics of legitimacy across species boundaries. Med Humanit. 2019;45(1):82-91.

6. Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990. Pub L. 101-336, 104 Stat. 327.

7. ADA Amendments Act of 2008. Pub L. 110-325.

8. Rehabilitation Act of 1973. Pub L. 93-112, 87 Stat 355.

9. Carroll JD, Mohlenhoff BS, Kersten CM, et al. Laws and ethics related to emotional support animals. J Am Acad Psychiatry Law. 2020;48(4):509-518.

10. Sanchez v US Dept of Energy. 870 F3d 1185 (10th Circuit 2017).

11. Berardelli v Allied Services Inst. of Rehab. Med., 900 F3d 104 (3rd Circuit 2018).

12. Air Carrier Access Act of 1986. 49 USC §41705.

13. US Department of Transportation. US Department of Transportation announces final rule on traveling by air with service animals. Published December 2, 2020. Accessed July 28, 2021. https://www.transportation.gov/briefing-room/us-department-transportation-announces-final-rule-traveling-air-service-animals

14. Fair Housing Amendments Act of 1988. Pub. L. 100-430. https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/STATUTE-102/pdf/STATUTE-102-Pg1619.pdf

15. Boness CL, Younggren JN, Frumkin IB. The certification of emotional support animals: difference between clinical and forensic mental health practitioners. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice. 2017;48(3):216-223.

16. Lane DR, McNicholas J, Collis GM. Dogs for the disabled: benefits to recipients and welfare of the dog. Applied Animal Behaviour Science. 1998;59(1-3):49-60.

17. Hall SS, MacMichael J, Turner A, et al. A survey of the impact of owning a service dog on quality of life for individuals with physical and hearing disability: a pilot study. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2017;15(1):59. doi:10.1186/s12955-017-0640-x

18. Brooks HL, Rushton K, Lovell K, et al. The power of support from companion animals for people living with mental health problems: a systematic review and narrative synthesis of the evidence. BMC Psychiatry. 2018;18(1):31. doi: 10.1186/s12888-018-1613-2

19. US National Library of Medicine: ClinicalTrials.gov. Can service dogs improve activity and quality of life in veterans with PTSD? (SDPTSD). Updated August 15, 2019. Accessed October 14, 2021. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/study/NCT02039843

20. Clay RA. Is that a pet or therapeutic aid? American Psychological Association. 2016;47(8):38. https://www.apa.org/monitor/2016/09/pet-aid

21. Younggren JN, Boisvert JA, Boness CL. Examining emotional support animals and role conflicts in professional psychology. Prof Psychol Res Pr. 2016;47(4):255-260.

22. Gold LH, Anfang SA, Drukteinis AM, et al. AAPL practice guideline for the forensic evaluation of psychiatric disability. J Am Acad Psychiatry Law. 2008;36(4 Suppl):S3-S50. https://www.aapl.org/docs/pdf/Evaluation%20of%20Psychiatric%20Disability.pdf

Issue
Current Psychiatry - 20(11)
Issue
Current Psychiatry - 20(11)
Page Number
16-19, 24
Page Number
16-19, 24
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.
Conference Recap Checkbox
Not Conference Recap
Clinical Edge
Display the Slideshow in this Article
Medscape Article
Display survey writer
Reuters content
Disable Inline Native ads
WebMD Article
Article PDF Media

Workplace violence: Enhance your safety in outpatient settings

Article Type
Changed
Wed, 08/04/2021 - 10:56
Display Headline
Workplace violence: Enhance your safety in outpatient settings

In the health care setting, workplace violence directed by patients against clinicians or other staff (eg, verbal or physical assaults) is common.1-3 Factors that contribute to violent incidents within mental health settings include communication problems, substance use, patients’ noncompliance with medications, procedural failures (administrative and legal), and a lack of resources.4

Being verbally or physically assaulted, stalked, or threatened by a patient is a reality for mental health professionals, especially in outpatient settings with limited resources and a lack of onsite security.5 Addressing the concerns outlined in this article can enhance your safety in outpatient settings. These steps should be customized for your practice with the possible assistance of legal counsel, risk management, and/or law enforcement.5

Plans and policies to mitigate the risk of violence. Assess for hazards within and around the workplace.5 Learn to assess your patient’s violence risk level in pre-screening interviews before their first appointment. Create a violence prevention and response plan, which may involve calling law enforcement if you fear for your safety or the safety of others.5 The confidentiality clauses of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act make an exception to allow for disclosure to prevent or reduce a serious and substantial threat to the health or safety of an individual or society (you should limit your disclosure to pertinent nonclinical information).5,6 Develop policies and procedures to identify, communicate, track, and document patients’ concerning behaviors as well as policies and procedures to terminate care of patients who display these concerning behaviors.5 These plans and policies should include informing patients that neither violence nor threats of any kind will be tolerated. Frequently review these plans and policies with clinic personnel; these documents should be easily accessible to everyone (eg, posted on a board).

Communication and education. Keep open lines of communication with all clinic personnel, and encourage them to promptly report incidents and any concerning patient behaviors. Frequently check in with them about any safety concerns they have, and encourage them to suggest ways to reduce risks.7 Include discussions about safety during clinic meetings. Educate clinic personnel about the nonverbal warning signs of behavior escalation, and provide de-escalation and response training.5 Hold simulation drills so clinic personnel can become more familiar with the violence prevention and response plan.

Office safety. Install a security barrier between the waiting room and office spaces so that patients cannot easily barge into the office spaces. Ensure access to the office areas is restricted to clinic personnel using access card readers, electronic locks, locks with deadbolts, etc.5 Escort patients within the office and ensure that individuals who are not associated with the clinic are not permitted to enter any area of the office alone.5 Install video surveillance cameras at entrances, exits, and other strategic locations and post signs signaling their presence.5 Post signs stating that concealed weapons are not allowed on the premises. Install panic buttons in each office, at the reception desk, and other areas (eg, restrooms).5 Develop a code word or phrase that will allow front desk staff to know that you are in trouble when they call your office. Have a designated room in which staff can gather and lock themselves if they are not able to escape.5 Provide law enforcement with floor plans of the clinic to help expedite their response.2

Personal safety. During patient visits, position yourself so you can exit a room quickly if needed, and avoid having your back to the exit.5,7 Ensure the patient is not blocking the exit. Avoid wearing attire that can be used as a weapon against you, such as a tie or necklace, or can impede your escape, such as high heels.7 Avoid wearing valuable accessories that can be damaged or destroyed during a “take down.”7 Wear an audible alarm.5 Avoid posting personal information that is publicly accessible (eg, in the office or online) and may reveal your habits.5 Insist upon a “buddy system” in which no one works alone, including outside normal business hours, or goes to their car alone.5

References

1. Phillips JP. Workplace violence against health care workers in the United States. N Engl J Med. 2016;374(17):1661-1669.
2. Workplace violence: issues in response. Rugala EA, Issacs AR (eds). Critical Incident Response Group, National Center for Analysis of Violent Crime, FBI Academy. 2003. Accessed November 27, 2020. https://www.fbi.gov/file-repository/stats-services-publications-workplace-violence-workplace-violence/view
3. Velani KH. 2019 Healthcare Crime Survey. International Association for Healthcare Security and Safety – Foundation (IAHSS – Foundation). Accessed November 27, 2020. https://iahssf.org/crime-surveys/2019-healthcare-crime-survey/3/
4. O’Rourke M, Wrigley C, Hammond S. Violence within mental health services: how to enhance risk management. Risk Manag Healthc Policy. 2018;11:159-167.
5. Neal D. Seven actions to ensure safety in psychiatric office settings. Psychiatric News. 2020;55(7):15.
6. Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996. Public Law No. 104–191, 110 Stat. 1936 (1996).
7. Xiong GL, Newman WJ. Take CAUTION in emergency and inpatient psychiatric settings. Current Psychiatry. 2013;12(7):9-10.

Article PDF
Author and Disclosure Information

Dr. Joshi is Associate Professor of Clinical Psychiatry and Associate Director, Forensic Psychiatry Fellowship, Department of Neuropsychiatry and Behavioral Science, University of South Carolina School of Medicine, Columbia, South Carolina.

Disclosure
The author reports no financial relationships with any companies whose products are mentioned in this article, or with manufacturers of competing products.

Issue
Current Psychiatry - 20(8)
Publications
Page Number
37-38
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

Dr. Joshi is Associate Professor of Clinical Psychiatry and Associate Director, Forensic Psychiatry Fellowship, Department of Neuropsychiatry and Behavioral Science, University of South Carolina School of Medicine, Columbia, South Carolina.

Disclosure
The author reports no financial relationships with any companies whose products are mentioned in this article, or with manufacturers of competing products.

Author and Disclosure Information

Dr. Joshi is Associate Professor of Clinical Psychiatry and Associate Director, Forensic Psychiatry Fellowship, Department of Neuropsychiatry and Behavioral Science, University of South Carolina School of Medicine, Columbia, South Carolina.

Disclosure
The author reports no financial relationships with any companies whose products are mentioned in this article, or with manufacturers of competing products.

Article PDF
Article PDF

In the health care setting, workplace violence directed by patients against clinicians or other staff (eg, verbal or physical assaults) is common.1-3 Factors that contribute to violent incidents within mental health settings include communication problems, substance use, patients’ noncompliance with medications, procedural failures (administrative and legal), and a lack of resources.4

Being verbally or physically assaulted, stalked, or threatened by a patient is a reality for mental health professionals, especially in outpatient settings with limited resources and a lack of onsite security.5 Addressing the concerns outlined in this article can enhance your safety in outpatient settings. These steps should be customized for your practice with the possible assistance of legal counsel, risk management, and/or law enforcement.5

Plans and policies to mitigate the risk of violence. Assess for hazards within and around the workplace.5 Learn to assess your patient’s violence risk level in pre-screening interviews before their first appointment. Create a violence prevention and response plan, which may involve calling law enforcement if you fear for your safety or the safety of others.5 The confidentiality clauses of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act make an exception to allow for disclosure to prevent or reduce a serious and substantial threat to the health or safety of an individual or society (you should limit your disclosure to pertinent nonclinical information).5,6 Develop policies and procedures to identify, communicate, track, and document patients’ concerning behaviors as well as policies and procedures to terminate care of patients who display these concerning behaviors.5 These plans and policies should include informing patients that neither violence nor threats of any kind will be tolerated. Frequently review these plans and policies with clinic personnel; these documents should be easily accessible to everyone (eg, posted on a board).

Communication and education. Keep open lines of communication with all clinic personnel, and encourage them to promptly report incidents and any concerning patient behaviors. Frequently check in with them about any safety concerns they have, and encourage them to suggest ways to reduce risks.7 Include discussions about safety during clinic meetings. Educate clinic personnel about the nonverbal warning signs of behavior escalation, and provide de-escalation and response training.5 Hold simulation drills so clinic personnel can become more familiar with the violence prevention and response plan.

Office safety. Install a security barrier between the waiting room and office spaces so that patients cannot easily barge into the office spaces. Ensure access to the office areas is restricted to clinic personnel using access card readers, electronic locks, locks with deadbolts, etc.5 Escort patients within the office and ensure that individuals who are not associated with the clinic are not permitted to enter any area of the office alone.5 Install video surveillance cameras at entrances, exits, and other strategic locations and post signs signaling their presence.5 Post signs stating that concealed weapons are not allowed on the premises. Install panic buttons in each office, at the reception desk, and other areas (eg, restrooms).5 Develop a code word or phrase that will allow front desk staff to know that you are in trouble when they call your office. Have a designated room in which staff can gather and lock themselves if they are not able to escape.5 Provide law enforcement with floor plans of the clinic to help expedite their response.2

Personal safety. During patient visits, position yourself so you can exit a room quickly if needed, and avoid having your back to the exit.5,7 Ensure the patient is not blocking the exit. Avoid wearing attire that can be used as a weapon against you, such as a tie or necklace, or can impede your escape, such as high heels.7 Avoid wearing valuable accessories that can be damaged or destroyed during a “take down.”7 Wear an audible alarm.5 Avoid posting personal information that is publicly accessible (eg, in the office or online) and may reveal your habits.5 Insist upon a “buddy system” in which no one works alone, including outside normal business hours, or goes to their car alone.5

In the health care setting, workplace violence directed by patients against clinicians or other staff (eg, verbal or physical assaults) is common.1-3 Factors that contribute to violent incidents within mental health settings include communication problems, substance use, patients’ noncompliance with medications, procedural failures (administrative and legal), and a lack of resources.4

Being verbally or physically assaulted, stalked, or threatened by a patient is a reality for mental health professionals, especially in outpatient settings with limited resources and a lack of onsite security.5 Addressing the concerns outlined in this article can enhance your safety in outpatient settings. These steps should be customized for your practice with the possible assistance of legal counsel, risk management, and/or law enforcement.5

Plans and policies to mitigate the risk of violence. Assess for hazards within and around the workplace.5 Learn to assess your patient’s violence risk level in pre-screening interviews before their first appointment. Create a violence prevention and response plan, which may involve calling law enforcement if you fear for your safety or the safety of others.5 The confidentiality clauses of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act make an exception to allow for disclosure to prevent or reduce a serious and substantial threat to the health or safety of an individual or society (you should limit your disclosure to pertinent nonclinical information).5,6 Develop policies and procedures to identify, communicate, track, and document patients’ concerning behaviors as well as policies and procedures to terminate care of patients who display these concerning behaviors.5 These plans and policies should include informing patients that neither violence nor threats of any kind will be tolerated. Frequently review these plans and policies with clinic personnel; these documents should be easily accessible to everyone (eg, posted on a board).

Communication and education. Keep open lines of communication with all clinic personnel, and encourage them to promptly report incidents and any concerning patient behaviors. Frequently check in with them about any safety concerns they have, and encourage them to suggest ways to reduce risks.7 Include discussions about safety during clinic meetings. Educate clinic personnel about the nonverbal warning signs of behavior escalation, and provide de-escalation and response training.5 Hold simulation drills so clinic personnel can become more familiar with the violence prevention and response plan.

Office safety. Install a security barrier between the waiting room and office spaces so that patients cannot easily barge into the office spaces. Ensure access to the office areas is restricted to clinic personnel using access card readers, electronic locks, locks with deadbolts, etc.5 Escort patients within the office and ensure that individuals who are not associated with the clinic are not permitted to enter any area of the office alone.5 Install video surveillance cameras at entrances, exits, and other strategic locations and post signs signaling their presence.5 Post signs stating that concealed weapons are not allowed on the premises. Install panic buttons in each office, at the reception desk, and other areas (eg, restrooms).5 Develop a code word or phrase that will allow front desk staff to know that you are in trouble when they call your office. Have a designated room in which staff can gather and lock themselves if they are not able to escape.5 Provide law enforcement with floor plans of the clinic to help expedite their response.2

Personal safety. During patient visits, position yourself so you can exit a room quickly if needed, and avoid having your back to the exit.5,7 Ensure the patient is not blocking the exit. Avoid wearing attire that can be used as a weapon against you, such as a tie or necklace, or can impede your escape, such as high heels.7 Avoid wearing valuable accessories that can be damaged or destroyed during a “take down.”7 Wear an audible alarm.5 Avoid posting personal information that is publicly accessible (eg, in the office or online) and may reveal your habits.5 Insist upon a “buddy system” in which no one works alone, including outside normal business hours, or goes to their car alone.5

References

1. Phillips JP. Workplace violence against health care workers in the United States. N Engl J Med. 2016;374(17):1661-1669.
2. Workplace violence: issues in response. Rugala EA, Issacs AR (eds). Critical Incident Response Group, National Center for Analysis of Violent Crime, FBI Academy. 2003. Accessed November 27, 2020. https://www.fbi.gov/file-repository/stats-services-publications-workplace-violence-workplace-violence/view
3. Velani KH. 2019 Healthcare Crime Survey. International Association for Healthcare Security and Safety – Foundation (IAHSS – Foundation). Accessed November 27, 2020. https://iahssf.org/crime-surveys/2019-healthcare-crime-survey/3/
4. O’Rourke M, Wrigley C, Hammond S. Violence within mental health services: how to enhance risk management. Risk Manag Healthc Policy. 2018;11:159-167.
5. Neal D. Seven actions to ensure safety in psychiatric office settings. Psychiatric News. 2020;55(7):15.
6. Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996. Public Law No. 104–191, 110 Stat. 1936 (1996).
7. Xiong GL, Newman WJ. Take CAUTION in emergency and inpatient psychiatric settings. Current Psychiatry. 2013;12(7):9-10.

References

1. Phillips JP. Workplace violence against health care workers in the United States. N Engl J Med. 2016;374(17):1661-1669.
2. Workplace violence: issues in response. Rugala EA, Issacs AR (eds). Critical Incident Response Group, National Center for Analysis of Violent Crime, FBI Academy. 2003. Accessed November 27, 2020. https://www.fbi.gov/file-repository/stats-services-publications-workplace-violence-workplace-violence/view
3. Velani KH. 2019 Healthcare Crime Survey. International Association for Healthcare Security and Safety – Foundation (IAHSS – Foundation). Accessed November 27, 2020. https://iahssf.org/crime-surveys/2019-healthcare-crime-survey/3/
4. O’Rourke M, Wrigley C, Hammond S. Violence within mental health services: how to enhance risk management. Risk Manag Healthc Policy. 2018;11:159-167.
5. Neal D. Seven actions to ensure safety in psychiatric office settings. Psychiatric News. 2020;55(7):15.
6. Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996. Public Law No. 104–191, 110 Stat. 1936 (1996).
7. Xiong GL, Newman WJ. Take CAUTION in emergency and inpatient psychiatric settings. Current Psychiatry. 2013;12(7):9-10.

Issue
Current Psychiatry - 20(8)
Issue
Current Psychiatry - 20(8)
Page Number
37-38
Page Number
37-38
Publications
Publications
Article Type
Display Headline
Workplace violence: Enhance your safety in outpatient settings
Display Headline
Workplace violence: Enhance your safety in outpatient settings
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.
Conference Recap Checkbox
Not Conference Recap
Clinical Edge
Display the Slideshow in this Article
Medscape Article
Display survey writer
Reuters content
Disable Inline Native ads
WebMD Article
Article PDF Media