We have located links that may give you full text access.
Evaluation of a novel risk assessment method for self-harm associated with Borderline Personality Disorder.
Australasian Psychiatry : Bulletin of Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrists 2017 October
OBJECTIVES: Borderline personality disorder (BPD) is associated with frequent self-harm and suicidal behaviours. This study compared physician-assessed self-harm risk and intervention choice according to a (i) standard risk assessment and (ii) BPD-specific risk assessment methods.
METHODS: Forty-five junior and senior mental health physicians were assigned to standard or BPD-specific risk training groups. The assessment utilized a BPD case vignette containing four scenarios describing high/low lethality self-harm and chronic/new patterns of self-harm behaviour. Participants chose from among four interventions, each corresponding to a risk category.
RESULTS: Standard and BPD-specific groups were alike in their assessment of self-harm risk. Divergence occurred on intervention choice for assessments of low lethality, chronic risk ( p<.01) and high lethality, chronic risk ( p<.005). Overall, psychiatrists were more likely than their junior colleagues to correctly assess risk and management options.
CONCLUSIONS: Although standard and BPD-specific methods are well aligned for assessing self harm-associated risk, BPD-specific training raised awareness of BPD-appropriate interventions, particularly in the context of chronic patterns of self-harm behaviour. Wider dissemination of BPD-specific risk training may enhance the confidence of mental health clinicians in identifying the nature of self-harm risk as well as the most clinically appropriate interventions for clients with BPD.
METHODS: Forty-five junior and senior mental health physicians were assigned to standard or BPD-specific risk training groups. The assessment utilized a BPD case vignette containing four scenarios describing high/low lethality self-harm and chronic/new patterns of self-harm behaviour. Participants chose from among four interventions, each corresponding to a risk category.
RESULTS: Standard and BPD-specific groups were alike in their assessment of self-harm risk. Divergence occurred on intervention choice for assessments of low lethality, chronic risk ( p<.01) and high lethality, chronic risk ( p<.005). Overall, psychiatrists were more likely than their junior colleagues to correctly assess risk and management options.
CONCLUSIONS: Although standard and BPD-specific methods are well aligned for assessing self harm-associated risk, BPD-specific training raised awareness of BPD-appropriate interventions, particularly in the context of chronic patterns of self-harm behaviour. Wider dissemination of BPD-specific risk training may enhance the confidence of mental health clinicians in identifying the nature of self-harm risk as well as the most clinically appropriate interventions for clients with BPD.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app