Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-2xdlg Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-22T05:51:21.032Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

P104: What are the current practices and barriers to screening for suicidal thoughts in Canadian emergency departments?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 May 2020

J. Fernandes
Affiliation:
University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC
A. Chakraborty
Affiliation:
University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC
F. Scheuermeyer
Affiliation:
University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC
S. Barbic
Affiliation:
University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC
D. Barbic
Affiliation:
University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Introduction: Suicide is the 9th leading cause of death in Canada, and a common reason for patients to present to Canadian emergency departments (ED). Little knowledge exists around Canadian emergency physicians (EPs) current practices and barriers to screening for suicidal thoughts (ST). Methods: We developed a web-based survey on suicide knowledge, which was pilot tested by two emergency physicians and one psychiatrist for clarity and content. The survey was distributed via email to attending physician members of the Canadian Association of Emergency Physicians. Data were described using counts, means, medians and interquartile ranges. Results: 193 EPs responded to the survey (response rate 16%), with 42% of EPs practicing in Ontario. 35% of EPs were female, the mean age was 48 (95% CI 47.3-48.7), and mean years in practice was 17 (95% CI 16.3-17.7). Academic practice location was reported by 55% of EPs, and 81% reported access to an inpatient psychiatry service. 142 EPs (82%) reported no protocol for screening for ST in their ED. Of EPs reporting an existing protocol, the most common practice was routine screening at triage (43%). The most commonly identified screening tools were HEADS-ED (25%) and PHQ-9 (21%). 70% of EPs felt the ED was a good place for screening for ST, yet 66% identified slower clinical care as a potential barrier. A strong commitment to treatment and follow up was identified by 68% of EPs as a necessary requirement to implementing ST screening in their ED. A targeted 2-4 question screen was the preferred screening option for 62% of EPs responding. Conclusion: A majority of EPs report no protocol for screening for ST in their ED, yet identify the ED as a good place for screening efforts. Potential barriers to widespread ST screening in the ED include a strong commitment to patient treatment and follow up, and diminished clinical efficiency.

Type
Poster Presentations
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Association of Emergency Physicians 2020