The Content of Patient-Identified Suicidal Drivers within CAMS Treatment Planning

Abstract

The Collaborative Assessment and Management of Suicidality (CAMS) is an evidence-based, suicide-focused, clinical framework that effectively treats people who are suicidal across clinical settings. A central tool within CAMS is the Suicide Status Form (SSF) which is a multipurpose assessment, treatment planning, tracking, to clinical outcome tool that guides suicide-focused care from the start of CAMS treatment to completion. Previous SSF assessment research investigated the content of patient-written qualitative responses to SSF assessment prompts which were reliably coded into twelve content categories. Four coding categories captured 70% of written responses revealing the content of patients’ suicidal ideation which centered on: relationships, vocation, the self, and unpleasant internal states. While qualitative SSF assessment research has thus revealed key information about suicidal ideation content, patient-identified “drivers” of suicide within CAMS treatment planning have not yet been examined qualitatively. “Drivers” of suicide are the issues that compel one to consider suicide, and ultimately become the focus of CAMS treatment; thus, it is important to examine their qualitative content. The present exploratory study investigated suicide driver content collected in the context of two randomized controlled trials of CAMS. Reliably coded qualitative content of patient-articulated drivers were comparable to previously noted SSF content assessment results, emphasizing the following driver issues: (1) Relationships, (2) Unpleasant Internal States (e.g., suffering and anxiety), (3) Role Responsibility (vocational concerns), and (4) the Self (e.g., self-hatred or esteem issues). These four coding themes captured 70% of 332 total treatment planning drivers obtained from 166 patients who were suicidal and seeking treatment. Implications of these findings are discussed.

Keywords:

• CAMS
• drivers
• suicidal ideation
• treatment planning

Additional information

Funding

Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT01300169. This work was supported by the Department of the Army through federal grant W81XWH-11-1-0164, awarded and administered by the Military Operational Medicine Research Program (MOMRP). The views expressed in this manuscript are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official policy of the Department of Defense, the Department of the Army, the U.S. Army Medical Department, the Department of Veterans Affairs, or the U.S. government..

Notes on contributors

Thomas Lynch

Thomas Lynch, Victoria Colborn Bathe, and David A. Jobes, The Catholic University of America, Washington, DC, USA.

Victoria Colborn Bathe

Thomas Lynch, Victoria Colborn Bathe, and David A. Jobes, The Catholic University of America, Washington, DC, USA.

David A. Jobes

Thomas Lynch, Victoria Colborn Bathe, and David A. Jobes, The Catholic University of America, Washington, DC, USA.