@article{ref1,
title="Intensive in-patient and community intervention versus routine care after attempted suicide. A randomised controlled intervention study",
journal="British journal of psychiatry",
year="1997",
author="van der Sande, R. and van Rooijen, L. and Buskens, E. and Allart, E. and Hawton, Keith E. and van der Graaf, Y. and Van Engeland, H.",
volume="171",
number="",
pages="35-41",
abstract="BACKGROUND: A randomised clinical trial was carried out in suicide attempters to assess clinical efficacy of an intensive psychosocial intervention compared with treatment as usual. METHOD: Two hundred and seventy-four suicide attempters presenting for medical treatment were randomly assigned to either intensive psychosocial treatment or 'care as usual'. Intensive psychosocial treatment consisted of brief admission to a special crisis-intervention unit and problem-solving aftercare. 'Care as usual' included any form of treatment the assessing clinicians thought appropriate. Psychological well-being was evaluated by the SCL-90 and the Hopelessness Scale at 3, 6 and 12 months following entry in the study. RESULTS: No differences in outcome were found. The probability of repeat suicide attempts in the 12-month follow-up was 0.17 for patients in the experimental group and 0.15 for the control group. There were no differences in ratings on the SCL-90 and the Hopelessness Scale. Patients in the experimental group attended significantly more out-patient treatment sessions. CONCLUSIONS: General implementation of an intensive in-patient and community intervention programme for suicide attempters does not seem justified.<p /><p>Language: en</p>",
language="en",
issn="0007-1250",
doi="",
url="http://dx.doi.org/"
}