Description

This five-year multi-site study consists of the following essential elements: (1) recruitment of 2,324 adolescents ages 12-17 years inclusive at baseline, and their parent/guardian; (2) initial assessment of youth and parent/guardian participants using direct interviews and standardized questionnaires; and (3) follow-up assessments of all participants at 3-months, 6-months, and 1-year post-baseline. To achieve the study objectives, the project will be conducted in 16 pediatric primary care practices.

The study consists of three phases of data collection: TAU, intervention, and sustainability. One thousand thirty-three suicidal youth will be enrolled during the TAU phase, and 1,291 suicidal youth will be enrolled during the intervention phase (total number of youth participants = 2,324). Youth and parent participants enrolled in the study will complete multiple questionnaires at four time points (baseline, 3-months, 6-months, and 12-months). Medical record reviews of youth participant files will occur throughout the study and be reviewed by research staff. The intervention phase is followed by a 6-month sustainability phase during which the participating practices will work on maintaining or further improving upon the anticipated gains made during the intervention phase.

Phase 1: TAU

TAU immediately precedes the intervention phase and ranges in length from 6 to 26 months. During TAU, participants will be treated according to usual and customary care, thus establishing each site's baseline rate of suicide risk screening and detection. Usual care at each participating practice involves screening for depression and suicide risk with the PHQ-9. This baseline rate will serve as the control for subsequent study phases.

Phase 2: Intervention

The intervention phase will range from 11 to 30 months. During this phase, each site will implement the clinical pathway, which includes universal screening for suicide risk using the Ask Suicide-Screening Questions (ASQ), a four-item questionnaire. Those who screen positive will then be evaluated using the Brief Suicide Safety Assessment (BSSA). The BSSA allows the clinician to assess the level of suicide risk to then choose how to proceed with clinical next steps. Clinicians will triage care based on three categories of risk: low-risk, further evaluation needed, and imminent-risk. The risk assessment will determine the type of care the individual then receives (e.g., mental health referrals, mental health evaluation and safety plan, tele-psychiatry crisis intervention consultation, send to ED).

We will also conduct in-depth qualitative interviews with a purposive sample of providers (e.g., physicians, nurses, social workers) at each of the participating sites. Purposive sampling is a way to identify and recruit participants that are especially experienced with or knowledgeable about a phenomenon of interest. Provider participants will complete a series of questionnaires at three separate times: 1) prior to clinical pathway training, 2) after training, and 3) 6 months after training. Provider participants will also be trained on the quality improvement process for implementing the intervention strategy. Some provider participants will be asked to complete up to four qualitative interviews that will focus on the implementation process, barriers and facilitators to successful implementation of the clinical pathway, and lessons learned.

Phase 3: Sustainability

The intervention phase is followed by a 6-month sustainability phase during which the site will work on maintaining or further improving upon the anticipated gains made during the intervention phase. No participants will be recruited during the sustainability phase and this phase will not be used to evaluate intervention effectiveness.

The specific aims include:

Aim 1: To implement, study, and improve through a Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) cycle, the STARRS-PC intervention that includes suicide risk detection, assessment and triage, and care management based on risk profile. PDSA is a systematic way to test a change that is implemented by breaking down the implementation process into specific steps, and then evaluating the outcome, improving on it, and testing again.

Aim 2: Test the effectiveness of STARRS-PC compared to TAU on the primary patient outcome, suicide attempts, secondary patient outcomes (suicidal ideation, non-suicidal self-injury (NSSI), and family satisfaction) at 12 months post-baseline, as well as mediators and moderators, through a stepped wedge design.

• Hypotheses: STARRS-PC will significantly reduce the rate of: 1) suicide attempts (nonfatal and fatal) and 2) suicidal ideation, NSSI, and improve family satisfaction during the 12-month post-baseline follow-up period compared with TAU.
• Exploratory Aim 2a: To examine whether increases in provider knowledge, self-efficacy, and buy-in regarding suicide risk screening, assessment, and management will mediate the intervention effect on patient outcomes.
• Exploratory Aim 2b: To examine whether organization readiness and practice integration will moderate effects of intervention on patient outcomes.

Aim 3: To identify barriers to and facilitators of implementation and sustainability of an intervention designed to improve suicide risk detection and risk management using qualitative interviews and surveys with clinical stakeholders at each study site.