Skip to main content
NIHPA Author Manuscripts logoLink to NIHPA Author Manuscripts
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2017 Feb 1.
Published in final edited form as: Ann Emerg Med. 2015 Oct 9;67(2):276–282. doi: 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2015.09.001

Managing Suicidal Patients in the Emergency Department

Marian E Betz 1, Edwin D Boudreaux 2
PMCID: PMC4724471  NIHMSID: NIHMS729089  PMID: 26443554

INTRODUCTION

Caring for emergency department (ED) patients with suicidal thoughts and behaviors is challenging, given time pressures, boarding of patients waiting for psychiatric beds, and the inherent difficulty in predicting imminent self-harm. However, providers—like patients—should not lose hope: most suicidal crises are short-lived and repeated attempts are not inevitable.1 Not every ED patient with suicidal thoughts needs inpatient admission, or even a mental health consultation, and ED providers should take pride in their skills to care for this at-risk population.

IDENTIFICATION OF SUICIDAL PATIENTS

Approximately 10% of all adult ED patients, regardless of chief complaint, have recent suicidal ideation or behaviors,2, 3 but many will not disclose unless asked. The Joint Commission requires suicide screening and assessment for patients with primary emotional or behavioral disorders or presenting symptoms.4 This mandate could be fulfilled with targeted screening (e.g., all patients with mental health complaints) or universal screening (all ED patients). As in the case of screening for any condition, a program not designed to fit an ED’s flow and culture may not perform, and there will be some patients who do not answer questions honestly. Early data suggest screening does identify people with otherwise hidden suicidal ideation5 without negatively impacting ED flow,6 and cost-effectiveness analyses are in progress. In this piece, we focus on management of suicidal ED patients, regardless of how they are identified.

GENERAL APPROACH

Suicidal patients are in acute emotional pain and, like patients in physical pain, deserve care that is empathetic and patient-centered. Small efforts, like explaining what to expect and providing basic comforts,7, 8 can improve the patient’s experience. ED providers may be skeptical about the preventability of suicide prevention or may harbor biases against patients with mental illness,9 so providers should strive to overcome their own areas of discomfort. Establishing rapport through a sympathetic but direct approach can enhance communication with the patient and thereby also the quality of the assessment. Importantly, asking a patient about suicidal thoughts or plans does not incite or encourage suicidal behavior,10 and providers should ask specific questions about the nature and content of suicidal thoughts, as described below in greater detail.

Information from appropriate “collateral” sources is particularly important for suicidal patients; relevant sources include prehospital or police personnel, the patient’s family or friends, or outpatient healthcare providers.10, 11 Asking the patient for permission enhances rapport, but an ED provider can make these contacts without consent when necessary to protect the individual or the public from an imminent and serious safety threat.12

SAFETY PRECAUTIONS

Patients being evaluated for suicidal thoughts or behaviors should not be allowed to leave the ED until the evaluation is complete13 and should be protected from self-harm while in the ED.14, 15 Typically, this includes placing the patient in a private room without access to potentially dangerous objects (e.g., belts, shoelaces, or sharp medical instruments).14 Mechanical or chemical restraints can be traumatic to the patient and impair rapport, so ED providers should first try to verbally de-escalate agitated patients (for example, by having extra personnel step out of sight and by engaging in collaborative, respectful conversation). Providers should advocate for a written ED policy concerning care of suicidal patients to clarify pathways and support provider actions, including use of constant observation, personal searches by security staff,13 or restraints.16

FOCUSED MEDICAL ASSESSMENT

A “focused medical assessment” – a term experts prefer over to “medical clearance,”17 which implies absence of medical issues– aims to identify medical issues requiring emergent or urgent treatment. A focused medical assessment relies primarily on the history and physical exam, including evaluation of the patient’s cognitive and emotional status and identification of drug ingestion, trauma, or other medical conditions that may affect the patient’s mental state. Routine diagnostic testing, including non-targeted laboratory or radiographic studies, has not demonstrated clinical benefit1821 and is not recommended.17 However, mental health consultants often will request tests like toxicologic screens.

SUICIDE RISK ASSESSMENT

There are many risk factors for suicide; some are fixed and some fluctuate, and their strength and interaction varies among and within individuals. An ED suicide risk assessment aims to determine appropriate treatment, including options across the spectrum from discharge with outpatient services to involuntary psychiatric hospitalization. Ultimately, risk assessment remains an inexact science, and the process should incorporate an individual’s personal history, current mental state, home environment, and specific suicidal thoughts or behaviors.

A small subset of patients with suicidal thoughts or behaviors can be managed by the ED provider and discharged home without a mental health consultation.8 Analogous to the use of decision “rule out” algorithms for patients with chest pain, the emergency provider should ask initial questions to triage patients and then consult a specialist when indicated. Emergency physicians pride themselves in risk-stratifying patients for myriad physical conditions without consulting specialists for every patient potentially at risk. Similarly, we suggest emergency physicians take ownership (and pride) in identifying which suicidal patients do not require an emergent mental health consultation. These lowest risk patients are those with no suicide plan or intent, no prior suicide attempt, no history of significant mental illness or substance abuse, and no agitation or irritability (Figure 1). These patients are often already identifiable to experienced clinicians – as an example, a middle-aged woman with her first bout of depression and vague suicidal thoughts who says she has a strong support system and would not actually kill herself because of her religion. The new Suicide Prevention Resource Center ED Guide,8 developed with input from multi-disciplinary experts and the major emergency medicine organizations, supports providers’ decision to forgo consultation in these low-risk cases. Specifically, the guide includes a six-question Decision Support Tool (Figure 1),8 which can be used to document medical decision-making justifying why a mental health consultation is or is not indicated. It may be especially useful in settings with universal screening, where there may be a larger volume of patients identified with low levels of suicidality.

Figure 1. Framework for care and evaluation of suicidal patients in the ED.

Figure 1

Intended for use with adult ED patients who do not require medical hospitalization for concomitant acute or chronic medical problems. Patients who are intoxicated or otherwise lacking in decision-making ability should be treated, observed, and reevaluated as clinically indicated. *See Figure 2. Adapted from Cappocia and Labre, 2015.8

The majority of suicidal ED patients, however, do need a comprehensive risk assessment to inform decision-making about treatment and disposition. For an adequate risk assessment, the patient should be cognitively able to participate; those intoxicated with alcohol or drugs should be observed and then have their cognitive capacity reassessed.8, 17 There are no data to support a particular blood alcohol level as the point at which a patient with normal vital signs and a noncontributory history and exam can undergo a psychiatric evaluation.17 However, as with urine testing, toxicologic screens may help mental health consultants in identifying concomitant substance abuse issues, so the issue merits discussion and collaboration. Patients who express suicidal thoughts when intoxicated and then deny them when more sober pose a particular and frustrating challenge, especially as patients with chronic alcohol or substance abuse may be frequent ED visitors. Both acute and chronic alcohol use raise the risk of suicide; over a third of suicide decedents use alcohol before their death,22 and adults with a substance use disorder are more likely to have serious suicidal thoughts, plans, and attempts.23 While the most conservative approach is to observe intoxicated patients until cognitively able to participate in a comprehensive suicide risk assessment, more work in this area is clearly needed.

Comprehensive assessments are typically done by mental health consultants (e.g., psychiatrists, psychologists or social workers), who generally have both more training and more time to spend with patients. ED physicians, however, retain final authority over and responsibility for discharge decisions. Consultations may be done either in person (by an on-site mental health specialist or one who comes to the ED on request) or remotely via electronic communication (“telepyschiatry”);8 decisions about consultations often depend on the ED environment and available resources. If a mental health consultant is not readily available, the ED provider can use the Suicide Assessment Five-step Evaluation and Triage (SAFE-T; Figure 2).24 This tool, available as a pocket-card and smartphone application,25 guides a provider through a step-wise evaluation of a patient’s risk and protective factors and the specifics of the suicidal thoughts or plans in order to estimate overall risk. Even when the ED provider is not completing the comprehensive assessment, the SAFE-T domains provide useful reminders about specific questions to ask patients.

Figure 2. Suicide Assessment Five-step Evaluation and Triage (SAFE-T).

Figure 2

Risk assessment modified slightly4244 from original SAFE-T.24, 25

ED-BASED INTERVENTIONS

Suicidal patients often have long ED lengths of stay while awaiting evaluation or psychiatric hospitalization. Brief ED interventions may be both therapeutic and helpful in preventing future self-harm, and they may be especially important for patients being discharged home. Recommended interventions focus on helping patients develop skills to recognize and cope with suicidal thoughts, including action plans for making their environment safer and for identifying sources of help. While interventions may be most effective when implemented as a bundle, local practices should be tailored to both need and feasibility.8 Templated materials and other resources exist for each of the example interventions discussed below (Table 1).8

Table 1.

ED-Based Brief Suicide Prevention Interventions

Intervention Comments Additional resources
Brief patient education
  • Goal: Instill hope of recovery, reduce shame and stigma

  • Include: Diagnosis, home care, follow-up instructions, warning signs for return to ED or call to crisis line

  • Use teach-back techniques and provide written version with community resources

Safety planning
  • Structured plan to identify coping strategies and contacts

Lethal means counseling
  • Goal: Reduce patient access to lethal methods (e.g., guns, toxic medications)

  • Discuss options for safe storage with others or in home

Rapid referral
  • Follow-up appointment within 7 day, ideally ≤24 hours

  • Troubleshoot barriers (e.g., transportation) to facilitate follow-up

Caring contacts (after discharge)
  • Brief communications (letter, telephone, text, email) to promote treatment adherence and feeling of connectedness

  • May be automated or made by non-clinical staff

Note: Each of the above should also include crisis line information: 1-800-273-8255 and http://www.suicidepreventionlifeline.org/ (online chat available)

Patient education and joint safety planning in the ED should include personalized plans with warning signs, follow-up, and emergency contacts.8, 26, 27 Safety planning is distinct from “contracting for safety”, which has not been shown to prevent suicide and is no longer recommended.27 Safety planning uses a step-by-step approach to help patients identify mechanisms for coping and help-seeking during times of crisis. The plan can be completed on paper and then stored in a free smart phone app (e.g., MY3 or SuicideSafe). Discharged suicidal patients need rapid referral for outpatient follow-up care, as the days just after discharge from an ED are a high risk period. Making a specific appointment before the individual leaves the ED and enlisting help from family or friends may help ensure follow-up.28

Counseling to reduce home access to lethal means (e.g., firearms and toxic medications) is an important aspect of ED care of suicidal patients. There is evidence that such counseling by providers can affect home storage behaviors29 and is acceptable to patients.30 The rationale behind means restriction is that suicidal acts are often impulsive31 and occur during short-lived crises,32 and that survival depends on the lethality of the chosen method.33 Guns have the highest suicide case-fatality rate (over 90%),34 and numerous studies have shown both an association between gun access and suicide risk,35 and that safe gun storage (i.e., locked, unloaded, and separated from ammunition) can mitigate this risk.36, 37 State “gag laws” do not prohibit physicians from asking suicidal patients about gun access.38, 39 ED providers should counsel all suicidal patients and their families to store firearms off-site (e.g., at a gun shop, police department, or other legal option) during a crisis; gun cabinets or locks at home may be a reasonable alternative as long as the patient does not have access.

DISPOSITION

For patients in acute crisis with moderate to high suicide risk, psychiatric hospitalization remains the typical disposition. In such cases, voluntary hospitalization is preferable when possible, in alignment with goals of collaborative, patient-centered care. When involuntary hospitalization (“emergency commitment”) is required, providers should adhere to their state laws, as these vary in definitions, length of commitment, and other requirements.40

Patients whose risk for imminent suicide is deemed acceptably low can often be managed as outpatients, depending on ED and outpatient resources. Such patients should be discharged to supportive, stable environments without access to guns or lethal medications. Caring contacts (Table 1), brief telephone, email or mail contacts after discharge, appear to decrease suicide attempts and deaths.41 All patients should be given the number for the National Suicide Prevention Hotline (1-800-273-TALK [8255]), a national, free telephone and online chat resource with crisis guidance, connection to local resources, and special services for veterans.

CONCLUSION

Through an empathetic, evidence-based, and collaborative approach49 to managing suicidal patients, ED providers can help prevent future injury and death. Focused medical assessment and suicide risk assessment can help providers determine if a mental health consultation is required and if the patient needs hospitalization. Brief ED interventions — including counseling about reducing access to firearms and toxic medications— may be both feasible and effective, depending on the ED environment and resources.. Suicide remains a leading cause of death in the United States, but ED providers have an opportunity to ease emotional pain and save lives.

Acknowledgments

Financial Support: This work was supported by the American Foundation for Suicide Prevention and by the Paul Beeson Career Development Award Program [The National Institute on Aging; AFAR; The John A. Hartford Foundation; and The Atlantic Philanthropies; grant number-K23AG043123]. Its contents are solely the responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official views of the funding agencies. No sponsor had any direct involvement in study design, methods, subject recruitment, data collection, analysis, or manuscript preparation.

Footnotes

Meetings: None

Conflicts of interest: Drs. Boudreaux and Betz were both unpaid participants in the development of the Decision Support Tool discussed in this article. They also received honoraria for participation in a related project led by the American Foundation for Suicide Prevention.

Publisher's Disclaimer: This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final citable form. Please note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.

References

  • 1.Owens D, Horrocks J, House A. Fatal and non-fatal repetition of self-harm: systematic review. Br J Psychiatry. 2002;181:193–199. doi: 10.1192/bjp.181.3.193. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Ilgen MA, Walton MA, Cunningham RM, et al. Recent suicidal ideation among patients in an inner city emergency department. Suicide Life Threat Behav. 2009;39:508–517. doi: 10.1521/suli.2009.39.5.508. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Claassen CA, Larkin GL. Occult suicidality in an emergency department population. Br J Psychiatry. 2005;186:352–353. doi: 10.1192/bjp.186.4.352. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Hospital National Patient Safety Goal 15.01.01. Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations; 2015. [Accessed May 27, 2015]. Available at: http://www.jointcommission.org/assets/1/6/2015_NPSG_BHC.pdf. [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Emergency Departments. A Key Setting for Suicide Prevention (Research to Practice Webinar) Suicide Prevention Resource Center; 2015. [Accessed June 26, 2015]. Available at: http://www.sprc.org/sites/sprc.org/files/event_materials/June_2015_R2P_EDs_Presentation.pdf. [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Betz ME, Arias SA, Miller M, et al. Change in emergency department providers’ beliefs and practices after use of new protocols for suicidal patients. Psychiat Serv. 2015;66:625–631. doi: 10.1176/appi.ps.201400244. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.The Way Forward. Pathways to hope, recovery, and wellness with insights from lived experience. Washington, DC: National Action Alliance for Suicide Prevention, Suicide Attempt Survivors Task Force; 2014. [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Capoccia L, Labre M. Caring for adult patients with suicide risk: A consensus-based guide for emergency departments. Waltham, MA: Education Development Center, Inc., Suicide Resource Prevention Center; 2015. [Accessed July 23, 2015]. Available at: http://www.sprc.org/ed-guide. [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Betz ME, Sullivan AF, Manton AP, et al. Knowledge, attitudes and practices of emergency department providers in the care of suicidal patients. Depress Anxiety. 2012;30:1005–1012. doi: 10.1002/da.22071. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Sood TR, McStay CM. Evaluation of the psychiatric patient. Emerg Med Clin North Am. 2009;27:669–683. ix. doi: 10.1016/j.emc.2009.07.005. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Good B, Walsh RM, Alexander G, et al. Assessment of the acute psychiatric patient in the emergency department: Legal cases and caveats. West J Emerg Med. 2014;15:312–317. doi: 10.5811/westjem.2013.8.18378. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Colpe LJ, Pringle BA. Data for Building a national suicide prevention strategy: What we have and what we need. Am J Prev Med. 2014;47:S130–S136. doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2014.05.024. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Mills PD, Watts BV, DeRosier JM, et al. Suicide attempts and completions in the emergency department in Veterans Affairs Hospitals. Emerg Med J. 2012;29:399–403. doi: 10.1136/emj.2010.105239. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Sentinel Event Alert, Issue 46: A follow-up report on preventing suicide: Focus on medical/surgical units and the emergency department. Vol. 46. The Joint Commission; 2010. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Best Practices for the Treatment of Patients with Mental and Substance Use Illnesses in the Emergency Department. Illinois Hospital Association, Behavioral Health Steering Committee Best Practices Task Force; 2007. Available at: http://www.ihatoday.org/uploadDocs/1/bestpractices.pdfAccessed. [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Coburn VA, Mycyk MB. Physical and chemical restraints. Emerg Med Clin North Am. 2009;27:655–667. ix. doi: 10.1016/j.emc.2009.07.003. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Lukens TW, Wolf SJ, Edlow JA, et al. Clinical policy: critical issues in the diagnosis and management of the adult psychiatric patient in the emergency department. Ann Emerg Med. 2006;47:79–99. doi: 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2005.10.002. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Fortu JMT, Kim IK, Cooper A, et al. Psychiatric patients in the pediatric emergency department undergoing routine urine toxicology screens for medical clearance: Results and use. Pediatr Emerg Care. 2009;25:387–392. doi: 10.1097/PEC.0b013e3181a79305. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Parmar P, Goolsby CA, Udompanyanan K, et al. Value of mandatory screening studies in emergency department patients cleared for psychiatric admission. West J Emerg Med. 2012;13:388–393. doi: 10.5811/westjem.2012.1.6754. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Korn CS, Currier GW, Henderson SO. “Medical clearance” of psychiatric patients without medical complaints in the Emergency Department. J Emerg Med. 2000;18:173–176. doi: 10.1016/s0736-4679(99)00191-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Donofrio JJ, Santillanes G, McCammack BD, et al. Clinical utility of screening laboratory tests in pediatric psychiatric patients presenting to the emergency department for medical clearance. Ann Emerg Med. 2014;63:666–675. e663. doi: 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2013.10.011. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Kaplan MS, Huguet N, McFarland BH, et al. Use of alcohol before suicide in the United States. Ann Epidemiol. 2014;24:588–592. e581–582. doi: 10.1016/j.annepidem.2014.05.008. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Results from the 2012 National Survey on Drug Use and Health: Mental Health Findings. Rockville, MD: Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, US Department of Health and Human Services; 2013. [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Suicide Assessment Five-Step Evaluation and Triage (SAFE-T) Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration; 2009. [Accessed January 2 2015]. Available at: http://store.samhsa.gov/product/Suicide-Assessment-Five-Step-Evaluation-and-Triage-SAFE-T-/SMA09-4432. [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Suicide Safe. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration; 2015. [Accessed May 27, 2015]. Available at: http://store.samhsa.gov/apps/suicidesafe/ [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Emergency Department Resource Toolkit. [Accessed May 27, 2015];National Alliance on Mental Illness. 2015 Available at: http://www2.nami.org/Template.cfm?Section=Issue_Spotlights&Template=/ContentManagement/ContentDisplay.cfm&ContentID=24452.
  • 27.Stanley B, Brown GK. Safety planning intervention: A brief intervention to mitigate suicide risk. Cogn Behav Pract. 2012;19:256–264. [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Granboulan V, Roudot-Thoraval F, Lemerle S, et al. Predictive factors of post-discharge follow-up care among adolescent suicide attempters. Acta Psychiatr Scand. 2001:31–36. doi: 10.1034/j.1600-0447.2001.00297.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Kruesi MJP, Grossman J, Pennington JM, et al. Suicide and violence prevention: Parent education in the emergency department. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 1999;38:250–255. doi: 10.1097/00004583-199903000-00010. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Walters H, Kulkarni M, Forman J, et al. Feasibility and acceptability of interventions to delay gun access in VA mental health settings. Gen Hosp Psychiatry. 2012;34:692–698. doi: 10.1016/j.genhosppsych.2012.07.012. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Deisenhammer EA, Ing CM, Strauss R, et al. The duration of the suicidal process: How much time is left for intervention between consideration and accomplishment of a suicide attempt? J Clin Psychiat. 2009;70:19–24. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Drum DJ, Brownson C, Denmark AB, et al. New data on the nature of suicidal crises in college students: Shifting the paradigm. Prof Psychol-Res Pr. 2009;40:213–222. [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Spicer RS, Miller TR. Suicide acts in 8 states: Incidence and case fatality rates by demographics and method. Am J Public Health. 2000;90:1885–1891. doi: 10.2105/ajph.90.12.1885. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Miller M, Azrael D, Hemenway D. The epidemiology of case fatality rates for suicide in the northeast. Ann Emerg Med. 2004;43:723–730. doi: 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2004.01.018. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Barber CW, Miller MJ. Reducing a suicidal person’s access to lethal means of suicide: A research agenda. Am J Prev Med. 2014;47:S264–S272. doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2014.05.028. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Grossman DC, Mueller BA, Riedy C, et al. Gun storage practices and risk of youth suicide and unintentional firearm injuries. JAMA. 2005;293:707–714. doi: 10.1001/jama.293.6.707. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Shenassa ED, Rogers ML, Spalding KL, et al. Safer storage of firearms at home and risk of suicide: a study of protective factors in a nationally representative sample. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2004;58:841–848. doi: 10.1136/jech.2003.017343. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Weinberger SE, Hoyt DB, Lawrence HC, III, et al. Firearm-related injury and death in the United States: A call to action from 8 health professional organizations and the American Bar Association. Ann Intern Med. 2015;162:513–516. doi: 10.7326/M15-0337. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Kuehn BM. Battle over florida legislation casts a chill over gun inquiries. JAMA. 2015 doi: 10.1001/jama.2015.3410. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Online Handbook: Civil Commitment. American Psychiatric Association; 2010. [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Brown GK, Green KL. A review of evidence-based follow-up care for suicide prevention: Where do we go from here? Am J Prev Med. 2014;47:S209–S215. doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2014.06.006. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42.Davidson CL, Olson-Madden JH, Betz ME, et al. Emergency department identification, assessment, and management of the suicidal patient. In: Koslow SH, Nemeroff PRCB, editors. A Concise Guide to Understanding Suicide. United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press; 2014. pp. 244–255. [Google Scholar]
  • 43.Bryan CJ, Rudd MD. Advances in the assessment of suicide risk. J Clin Psychol. 2006;62:185–200. doi: 10.1002/jclp.20222. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 44.Joiner TE, Walker RL, Rudd MD, et al. Scientizing and routinizing the assessment of suicidality in outpatient practice. Prof Psychol-Res Pr. 1999;30:447–453. [Google Scholar]
  • 45.After an Attempt: A Guide for Medical Providers in the Emergency Department Taking Care of Suicide Attempt Survivors. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, US Department of Health and Human Services; 2006. [Accessed July 7, 2015]. Available at: https://store.samhsa.gov/shin/content/SMA08-4359/SMA08-4359.pdf. [Google Scholar]
  • 46.After an Attempt: A Guide for Taking Care of Yourself After Your Treatment in the Emergency Department. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, US Department of Health and Human Services; 2006. [Accessed July 7, 2015]. Available at: https://store.samhsa.gov/shin/content/SMA08-4355/SMA08-4355.pdf. [Google Scholar]
  • 47.National Suicide Prevention Lifeline: After an Attempt: A Guide for Taking Care of Your Family Member After Treatment in the Emergency Department. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, US Department of Health and Human Services; 2006. [Accessed July 7, 2015]. Available at: https://store.samhsa.gov/shin/content/SMA08-4357/SMA08-4357.pdf. [Google Scholar]
  • 48.Firearm Safety and Injury Prevention. [Accessed July 23, 2015];American College of Emergency Physicians. 2013 Available at: http://www.acep.org/Clinical---Practice-Management/Firearm-Safety-and-Injury-Prevention/
  • 49.Petrik ML, Gutierrez PM, Berlin JS, Saunders SM. Barriers and facilitators of suicide risk assessment in emergency departments: A qualitative study of provider perspectives. Gen Hosp Psych. 2015 doi: 10.1016/j.genhosppsych.2015.06.018. Epub June 30. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

RESOURCES