158840 Do the means matter? Results from a survey of state suicide prevention coalitions

Monday, November 5, 2007

Catherine Barber, MPA , Harvard Injury Control Research Center, Harvard School of Public Health, Boston, MA
Mary G. Vriniotis, MS , Harvard Injury Control Research Center, Harvard School of Public Health, Boston, MA
Matthew Miller, MD, ScD , Harvard Injury Control Research Center, Harvard School of Public Health, Boston, MA
Deborah Azrael, PhD , Harvard Injury Control Research Center, Harvard School of Public Health, Boston, MA
Renee M. Johnson, PhD, MPH , Dept. of Social and Behavioral Sciences, Boston University School of Public Health, Boston, MA
David Hemenway, PhD , Harvard School of Public Health, Boston, MA
BACKGROUND: According to a recent review by an international panel of experts, reducing access to lethal means of suicide is one of only two intervention types that currently has evidence of effectiveness in preventing suicide. PURPOSE: To determine the extent to which U.S. statewide suicide prevention coalitions are implementing means reduction interventions. METHODS: We interviewed leaders of 44 statewide suicide prevention coalitions and conducted content analyses of their published suicide prevention plans. RESULTS: Preliminary results indicate most (85%) state prevention plans called for reducing access to lethal means of suicide, yet few (29%) were engaged in any means reduction work. Most respondents believed that a gun in the home increased the risk of suicide for adolescents (93%) and adults (91%). In response to the statement, “Almost all people who kill themselves with a gun were very determined to die,” 46% agreed and 45% disagreed (9% unsure). Forty percent believed that if a gun were not available to people who committed suicide with a gun, nearly all would have killed themselves using other means. 73% believed that most people who make a medically serious suicide attempt will eventually kill themselves. CONCLUSIONS: Most state suicide prevention plans formally call for reducing access to lethal means of suicide, yet few have implemented interventions in this area. Leaders of state coalitions are nearly unified in believing that a gun in the home increases the risk of suicide; however, they appear to disagree on why this is so.

Learning Objectives:
1. Articulate the evidence that reducing access to lethal means is an effective suicide prevention strategy 2. Identify the extent to which statewide suicide prevention coalitions are promoting means reduction interventions. 3. Characterize the beliefs and attitudes of coalition leaders about means reduction.

Keywords: Suicide, Firearms

Presenting author's disclosure statement:

Any relevant financial relationships? No
Any institutionally-contracted trials related to this submission?

I agree to comply with the American Public Health Association Conflict of Interest and Commercial Support Guidelines, and to disclose to the participants any off-label or experimental uses of a commercial product or service discussed in my presentation.