Skip to main content
Full access
Brief Reports
Published Online: 15 September 2015

Characteristics of U.S. Mental Health Facilities That Offer Suicide Prevention Services

Abstract

Objective:

This study characterized mental health facilities that offer suicide prevention services or outcome follow-up after discharge.

Methods:

The study analyzed data from 8,459 U.S. mental health facilities that participated in the 2010 National Mental Health Services Survey. Logistic regression analyses were used to compare facilities that offered neither of the prevention services with those that offered both or either service.

Results:

About one-fifth of mental health facilities reported offering neither suicide prevention services nor outcome follow-up. Approximately one-third offered both, 25% offered suicide prevention services only, and 21% offered only outcome follow-up after discharge. Facilities that offered neither service were less likely than facilities that offered either to offer comprehensive support services or special programs for veterans; to offer substance abuse services; and to be accredited, licensed, or certified.

Conclusions:

Further examination of facilitators and barriers in implementing suicide prevention services in mental health facilities is warranted.
In 2012, the Office of the Surgeon General and the National Action Alliance for Suicide Prevention (Action Alliance) released the National Strategy for Suicide Prevention to address the critical public health challenge of suicide in the United States (1). Goal 8 of the National Strategy is to “Promote suicide prevention as a core component of health care services.” In addition, the Action Alliance endorsed “zero suicide in health and behavioral health care” as one of its national priorities (zerosuicide.sprc.org/about). Health care systems can be important settings for suicide prevention. A review suggested that approximately 77% of individuals who died from suicide contacted a primary care physician and 32% contacted a mental health service provider a year prior to their death (2).
In addition, provision of follow-up care after discharge from a health care facility is an essential component of suicide prevention. Research has consistently found that the period after discharge from a hospital is one of the highest risk periods for suicide (3). Care factors, such as lack of continuity of care and noncompliance, in addition to factors such as past suicide attempts and low social support have been shown to be associated with suicide after discharge (4). Such evidence led to inclusion of and emphasis on improving follow-up care after discharge in the National Strategy (1).
A systems-of-care approach for suicide prevention has been emphasized (5). However, there is little understanding of the extent to which behavioral health facilities provide suicide prevention services. A targeted system improvement, such as that undertaken by the Henry Ford Healthcare system’s Zero Suicide Initiative, has been suggested to lower suicide rates (6). Nonetheless, the extent to which suicide prevention services or outcome follow-up after discharge are offered as a standard of care in U.S. mental health facilities is not fully understood. To inform our efforts to improve suicide prevention within health care settings, it is first necessary to understand the characteristics of mental health facilities that offer suicide prevention services and that have standard procedures in place to follow-up with patients after discharge. Using recently available data on U.S. mental health facilities, we examined facility-level characteristics associated with the availability of suicide prevention services and outcome follow-up after discharge.

Methods

All known public and private facilities that provide mental health treatment services in the United States (hereinafter called facilities) were eligible to participate in the National Mental Health Services Survey (N-MHSS), sponsored by the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA). Mental health treatment services were defined as “services focused on improving the mental well-being of individuals or promoting their recovery.” The survey was completed between June 2010 and January 2011 by a director of the facility or an administrator familiar with the operating procedures of the facility. This study reports on 8,459 of the 12,186 mental health facilities eligible for the survey. [A CONSORT diagram is available as an online supplement to this report.] More details on N-MHSS (7) are available on the SAMHSA Web site (www.samhsa.gov/data/DASIS/NMHSS2010_Web.pdf). Because the data collection for this study did not involve human subjects, institutional review board approval was not required.
The following two items were used to assess whether the facilities offered some form of suicide prevention services: suicide prevention services as part of the supportive services and practices offered at the facility, and client or patient outcome follow-up after discharge as a standard operating procedure (SOP). The facilities were then divided into four categories: offered neither, offered suicide prevention services only, offered outcome follow-up after discharge only, or offered both. [Details about these measures are included in the online supplement.]
The following characteristics were included in the analysis: facility type, mental health treatment in multiple settings, primary treatment focus, supportive services, facility sponsor or operator, age group accepted, licensing, certifications, accreditations, special programs for veterans, total single-day client count, urbanicity, and region. The survey also included questions about whether facilities operated a crisis intervention team within the facility or off site to handle acute mental health issues. [A figure in the online supplement illustrates the operation of a crisis intervention team either off site or within the facility across the four categories described above.] We further calculated the number and percentage of facilities across the categories for each facility-level characteristic examined. Because of our interest in distinguishing facilities that offered neither suicide prevention services nor outcome follow-up from facilities in the remaining three categories, we compared facilities that offered neither to facilities that offered both or either by using three logistic regression models. All analyses were performed with Stata, version 13.0 (8).

Results

Of the 8,459 mental health facilities included in this study, approximately one-fifth (21.2%) indicated that they did not offer either suicide prevention services or outcome follow-up after discharge; about one-fifth (21.2%) offered follow-up after discharge but not suicide prevention services; one-fourth (25.0%) offered suicide prevention services but not follow-up; and close to one-third (32.6%) offered both (Table 1).
TABLE 1. Characteristics of 8,459 U.S. mental health facilities, by type of suicide prevention services offereda
 Type of suicide prevention service offered
 Total (N=8,459)Neither (N=1,796, 21.2%)Outcome follow-up after discharge only (N=1,791, 21.2%)Suicide prevention services only (N=2,112, 25.0%)Both (N=2,760, 32.6%)
CharacteristicN%N%N%N%N%
Facility type          
 Hospital-based settingb1,63719.426414.720611.551824.564923.5
 Outpatient, day treatment, or partial  hospitalization mental health facility5,23361.91,20066.81,04558.31,36564.61,62358.8
 Residential treatment center1,32015.629416.446726.11718.138814.1
 Multisetting (nonhospital) mental  health facility2693.2382.1734.1582.81003.6
Offers mental health treatment in multiple settingsc          
 Yes1,36216.120311.323613.233315.859021.4
 No7,09783.91,59388.71,55586.81,77984.22,17078.6
Primary treatment focus          
 Mental health services6,33474.91,52284.71,39377.81,59575.51,82466.1
 Mix of mental health and substance  abuse services2,12525.127415.339822.251724.593633.9
Facility sponsor or operator          
 Private nonprofit organization5,68067.21,30972.91,31273.31,39165.91,66860.4
 Private-for-profit organization7839.31367.620011.21316.231611.5
 State mental health agency6167.3834.6955.31909.02489.0
 Local, county, or municipal  government7849.31498.31257.025912.32519.1
 Other5967.01196.6593.31416.727710.0
Age group accepted for treatment          
 Both youths and adults4,28050.682646.078143.61,18856.31,48553.8
 Adults only3,11336.872840.565936.874835.497835.4
 Youths only1,06612.624213.535119.61768.329710.8
Disease management and coordination-related support servicesd          
 01,20014.250928.333518.72039.61535.5
 12,36828.061234.164836.252825.058021.0
 22,15125.437320.844324.758927.974627.0
 ≥32,74032.430216.836520.479237.51,28146.4
Housing-related support servicese          
 05,62666.51,35875.61,27271.01,43167.81,56556.7
 11,56018.429016.232117.934616.460321.8
 2 or 31,27315.01488.219811.133515.959221.4
Employment-related support servicesf          
 None6,29774.41,53085.21,47082.11,49971.01,79865.1
 Either1,19414.11548.61779.936517.349818.0
 Both96811.41126.21448.024811.746416.8
Offers psychiatric emergency walk-in services3,17837.630316.931017.31,04849.61,51755.0
Licensing, certification, or accreditation          
 State mental health agency6,29674.41,26570.41,31373.31,65578.42,06374.8
 Joint Commission3,05336.158332.547026.287541.41,12540.8
 Commission on Accreditation of  Rehabilitation Facilities1,70320.120111.252429.322610.775227.2
 Medicaid5,45064.41,03757.71,07159.81,43668.01,90669.1
Offers special programs for veterans1,95423.122312.429116.249523.494534.2
Total single-day client count          
 <502,74332.461234.172440.455826.484930.8
 50–2492,76932.760533.763435.465330.987731.8
 ≥2502,94734.857932.243324.290142.61,03437.5
Region          
 Northeast1,89922.447026.243724.444521.154719.8
 Midwest2,28527.048427.054030.247622.578528.4
 South2,53029.945025.155731.163730.288632.1
 West1,74520.639221.825714.455426.254219.6
Urbanicityg          
 Large metropolitan county3,64643.187848.987048.682939.21,06938.7
 Medium metropolitan county1,55918.438021.231917.840619.245416.4
 Small metropolitan county98011.618710.419310.827012.833012.0
 Nonmetropolitan county2,27426.935119.540922.860728.790732.9
a
Source: 2010 National Mental Health Services Survey. All bivariate associations were significant (p<.001).
b
Psychiatric hospital or separate inpatient psychiatric unit of a general hospital
c
Inpatient, outpatient, or residential
d
Includes assertive community treatment, case management, chronic disease and illness management, illness management and recovery, and psychosocial rehabilitation services
e
Includes supported housing, housing services, and therapeutic foster care
f
Includes supported employment and vocational rehabilitation services
g
Based on the 2006 National Center for Health Statistics Urban-Rural Classification Scheme for Counties
The proportion of facilities operating crisis intervention teams was greater among those that offered both suicide prevention services and follow-up after discharge (close to 75% within or off site). Over one-third of facilities that offered neither service operated a crisis intervention team within their facility or off site [see figure in online supplement].
The examined characteristics differed across facilities offering suicide prevention services or follow-up after discharge (Table 1). In the adjusted model, several characteristics distinguished facilities that offered neither service from those that offered suicide prevention services or follow-up after discharge [see table in online supplement]. For example, facilities that offered a mix of mental health and substance abuse treatment, more comprehensive support services (such as disease management and coordination-related support services), and special programs for veterans were more likely to offer either suicide prevention services or follow-up after discharge or both than to offer neither service. Facilities that accepted adults only were more likely than those that accepted both youths and adults to offer neither service than to offer both or either service. Facilities certified or accredited by the Joint Commission, Commission on Accreditation of Rehabilitation Facilities, and Medicaid were more likely to offer both types of service than to offer neither service. Facilities with a larger single-day client count were more likely to offer both types of service than to offer neither service.

Discussion

This study of 8,459 U.S. mental health facilities in 2010 suggests that most offered suicide prevention services or had an SOP for outcome follow-up after discharge. However, approximately one-fifth had neither service in place, which points to a lack of suicide risk assessment, management, and prevention in these facilities. The facilities differed in characteristics such as treatment focus; age group accepted; additional supportive services offered; and licensing, certification, and accreditation.
Facilities with suicide prevention services and procedures for follow-up after discharge were more likely to provide an array of support services, treat both substance use and mental health services, and offer special programs for veterans. These results suggest an opportunity to incorporate suicide prevention services as part of the comprehensive package of support services in mental health facilities and are also consistent with increased attention to suicide prevention among substance users (9) and veterans (10). However, facilities without suicide prevention services were more likely to accept adults only than to accept both adults and youths. The lack of suicide prevention services in facilities that accept adults is a serious concern because a great number of suicides occur among adults (11).
Findings highlight the gap in meeting the needs of individuals with mental disorders. Such efforts may require system-level changes, such as adopting policies and procedures related to suicide prevention, improving collaboration and communication, and improving the suicide prevention skills of the workforce (5). In our study, over 46% of facilities had no SOP for follow-up care after discharge, which indicates a need to incorporate quality assurance procedures related to suicide prevention. Furthermore, the significant association between accreditation and offering suicide prevention services reinforces the importance of accreditation in advancing suicide prevention efforts in the mental health care delivery system. For example, in 2007, the Joint Commission included national patient safety goal 15.01.01 in the behavioral health care standards, which encourages organizations to identify individuals at risk of suicide (12). Further, a collaborative care approach may enhance system-level change to better respond to individuals at risk of suicide. In our study, over one-third of facilities without suicide prevention services operated a crisis intervention team for individuals with acute mental health problems. Crisis intervention services can play a vital role in intervening in suicidal crises and in providing postdischarge follow-up and care transitions. Finally, system-level change requires ensuring that professionals have adequate skills and training to respond appropriately to individuals at risk of suicide. Although suicide prevention is considered part of graduate training for mental health professionals, concerns have been raised about the lack of adequate training in suicide risk assessment required among mental health professionals (13). To address this concern, the Action Alliance recently published a core set of training guidelines for the clinical workforce on suicide assessment and intervention (14).
The study excluded certain facilities, such as military facilities operated by the Department of Defense. The items were reported by a single designated person at each facility, and results may have been subject to reporting bias. The available data did not allow us to examine state regulatory expectations, to identify specific types of suicide prevention services that were offered in these facilities, or to determine whether affiliated facilities—for example an outpatient counterpart of an inpatient facility—offered suicide prevention services instead. Outcome follow-up was not specific to suicide, although the survey specified “after discharge,” which is an important time point for suicide prevention. The strengths of the study include use of comprehensive data on the civilian mental health care system from more than 8,000 facilities nationwide and a unique focus on facility-level characteristics associated with suicide prevention.

Conclusions

In a large survey of U.S. mental health facilities, approximately one of five did not report offering either suicide prevention services or outcome follow-up after discharge as standards of care. These facilities were less likely to offer comprehensive support services or special programs for veterans; less likely to offer substance abuse services; and less likely to be accredited, licensed, or certified. The findings highlight the continued need to improve suicide prevention services in the mental health care system.

Footnote

The views expressed are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration or the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

Supplementary Material

File (appi.ps.201400335.ds001.pdf)

References

1.
2012 National Strategy for Suicide Prevention: Goals and Objectives for Action. Washington, DC, Department of Health and Human Services, Sept 2012
2.
Luoma JB, Martin CE, Pearson JL: Contact with mental health and primary care providers before suicide: a review of the evidence. American Journal of Psychiatry 159:909–916, 2002
3.
Olfson M, Marcus SC, Bridge JA: Focusing suicide prevention on periods of high risk. JAMA 311:1107–1108, 2014
4.
Troister T, Links PS, Cutcliffe J: Review of predictors of suicide within 1 year of discharge from a psychiatric hospital. Current Psychiatry Reports 10:60–65, 2008
5.
Suicide Care in Systems Framework: A Report to the National Action Alliance for Suicide Prevention’s Executive Committee. Washington, DC, National Action Alliance for Suicide Prevention, 2011
6.
Hampton T: Depression care effort brings dramatic drop in large HMO population’s suicide rate. JAMA 303:1903–1905, 2010
7.
National Mental Health Services Survey (N-MHSS): 2010. Data on Mental Health Treatment Facilities. Rockville, Md, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, 2014
8.
Stata Statistical Software, Release 13. College Station, Tex, StataCorp, 2013
9.
Addressing Suicidal Thoughts and Behaviors in Substance Abuse Treatment. Treatment Improvement Protocol 50. Rockville, Md, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, Center for Substance Abuse Treatment, 2009
10.
Bruce ML: Suicide risk and prevention in veteran populations. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 1208:98–103, 2010
11.
Deaths: Final Data for 2012. National Vital Statistics Reports. Atlanta, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2012. Available at www.cdc.gov/nchs/products/nvsr.htm
12.
Behavioral Health Care: National Patient Safety Goals, 2014. Washington, DC, Joint Commission, 2014
13.
Schmitz WM Jr, Allen MH, Feldman BN, et al: Preventing suicide through improved training in suicide risk assessment and care: an American Association of Suicidology Task Force report addressing serious gaps in US mental health training. Suicide and Life-Threatening Behavior 42:292–304, 2012
14.
Clinical Workforce Preparedness Task Force: Suicide Prevention and the Clinical Workforce: Guidelines for Training. Washington, DC, National Action Alliance for Suicide Prevention, 2014

Information & Authors

Information

Published In

Go to Psychiatric Services
Go to Psychiatric Services

Cover: Landscape, by Louis Comfort Tiffany, ca. 1892. Stained glass. Private Collection. Photo credit: Art Resource, New York City.

Psychiatric Services
Pages: 119 - 123
PubMed: 26369881

History

Received: 28 July 2014
Revision received: 26 January 2015
Accepted: 16 March 2015
Published online: 15 September 2015
Published in print: January 01, 2016

Authors

Details

S. Janet Kuramoto-Crawford, Ph.D., M.H.S.
Dr. Kuramoto-Crawford and Dr. Smith are with the Center for Behavioral Health Statistics and Quality and Dr. McKeon is with the Center for Mental Health Services, all at the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, Rockville, Maryland. Send correspondence to Dr. Smith (e-mail: [email protected]).
Kelley E. Smith, Ph.D., M.S.W.
Dr. Kuramoto-Crawford and Dr. Smith are with the Center for Behavioral Health Statistics and Quality and Dr. McKeon is with the Center for Mental Health Services, all at the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, Rockville, Maryland. Send correspondence to Dr. Smith (e-mail: [email protected]).
Richard McKeon, Ph.D.
Dr. Kuramoto-Crawford and Dr. Smith are with the Center for Behavioral Health Statistics and Quality and Dr. McKeon is with the Center for Mental Health Services, all at the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, Rockville, Maryland. Send correspondence to Dr. Smith (e-mail: [email protected]).

Competing Interests

The authors report no financial relationships with commercial interests.

Metrics & Citations

Metrics

Citations

Export Citations

If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.

For more information or tips please see 'Downloading to a citation manager' in the Help menu.

Format
Citation style
Style
Copy to clipboard

View Options

View options

PDF/EPUB

View PDF/EPUB

Get Access

Login options

Already a subscriber? Access your subscription through your login credentials or your institution for full access to this article.

Personal login Institutional Login Open Athens login
Purchase Options

Purchase this article to access the full text.

PPV Articles - Psychiatric Services

PPV Articles - Psychiatric Services

Not a subscriber?

Subscribe Now / Learn More

PsychiatryOnline subscription options offer access to the DSM-5-TR® library, books, journals, CME, and patient resources. This all-in-one virtual library provides psychiatrists and mental health professionals with key resources for diagnosis, treatment, research, and professional development.

Need more help? PsychiatryOnline Customer Service may be reached by emailing [email protected] or by calling 800-368-5777 (in the U.S.) or 703-907-7322 (outside the U.S.).

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Share

Share article link

Share