A suicide risk screening scale for HIV-infected persons in the immediate post-diagnosis period
R D Govender,1 BSc, MB ChB, MFamMed; L Schlebusch,
2 MA (Clin Psych), MMed Sc
(Psychiatry), PhD
1
Department of Family Medicine,
University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban, South Africa
2
Emeritus Professor of
Behavioural Medicine, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban,
South Africa
Corresponding author
:
R D Govender ([email protected])
Background. The risk of suicidal tendencies in
HIV-infected persons appears high and may parallel the
increasing prevalence of suicidal behaviour in South Africa.
Objective. To construct a brief suicide risk screening scale (SRSS) as a self-administered instrument to screen for suicidal ideation in recently diagnosed HIV-infected persons.
Methods. An SRSS was developed, drawing 14 items from two established screening tests, and assessed using a sample of 150 HIV-infected consenting adults identified at a voluntary counselling and testing (VCT) clinic at an academic district level hospital in Durban, South Africa. Participants returned three weeks after their initial assessment for a re-assessment.
Results. The internal consistency of the SRSS was good (Cronbach’s alpha, 0.87), and its sensitivity (81%) was higher than its specificity (47%). The findings suggest that, despite certain limitations, the SRSS may be a valuable screening tool for suicidal ideation at VCT clinics.
Conclusion. Screening for suicide risk and possible suicidal behaviour in HIV-positive persons may form a routine aspect of comprehensive patient care at VCT clinics to assist with effective prevention and treatment.
S Afr J HIV Med 2013;14(2):58-63.
DOI:10.7196/SAJHIVMED.899
Globally, suicide and HIV/AIDS remain two of the greatest
healthcare issues, particularly in low- and middle-income
countries where approximately 85% of suicides occur.1-3 The
World Health Organization (WHO) predicted that global suicide
mortality will increase to 1.53 million per annum by the year
2020.2
Suicide mortality rates have changed significantly in South
Africa (SA) since apartheid, with differences evident across
cities, races and gender.4 SA has a relatively high
12-month prevalence of anxiety and mood disorders compared with
other countries, which adds to the burden of suicide risk.5 In 2007
the overall rates for suicide in SA were high (0.9/100 000),6 and there
is an increasing occurrence of suicide among youth and men,
consistent with the international trend.7 At least one suicide is
committed every hour in SA, and 20 more unsuccessful attempts
are made in the same time-span, with one-third of non-fatal
attempts recorded among youth.6-8
The risk factors for suicide are diverse and inter-related, and may be particularly complex in HIV-infected individuals. One systematic literature review showed a high suicidal risk in persons with HIV: 19.7% were described as generally suicidal, 26.9% as having suicidal ideation and 9.4% completed suicides.9 There is also a high rate of lifetime suicide risk associated with depression.10 The prevalence of depression and anxiety in people living with HIV/AIDS is almost double that of HIV-negative individuals.11
There is growing evidence that this is true in SA and other African countries.12 , 13 The risk of suicide appears to be increasing in the context of the HIV epidemic. 14 , 15 Several SA studies have documented a correlation between suicidality and HIV at different points in disease progression,12 , 13-18 including the high prevalence of suicidal ideation among HIV-positive pregnant mothers.16 In a recent study conducted among HIV-positive persons in SA, suicidal ideation increased over a 6-week period and was present in 24% of the HIV-positive participants following HIV counselling and testing.17 This correlated with results of the WHO Multisite Intervention Study on Suicidal Behaviours (SUPRE-MISS) community survey, where the highest rates of lifetime suicidal thoughts and plans were found in Durban (25.4% and 15.6%, respectively).17 , 19 Despite the introduction of antiretroviral therapy (ART), the suicide rate remains more than 3 times higher among HIV-positive persons than in the general population.20 Although the international findings on the correlation between suicide and HIV/AIDS are diverse,10 the results show compelling evidence to screen for suicide risk and intervene as early as possible.9 , 10-12 Despite this, the assessment of suicide risk is not a routine aspect of HIV patient care in SA.
The lack of consistent definitions of suicidal behaviour across studies has led to confusion in the field of suicidology. Suicidality encompasses a range of suicidal behaviours, which in turn involve degrees of self-destruction that may be fatal or non-fatal. Suicidal ideation is defined as having the intent to commit suicide, wanting to take one's own life or thoughts about suicide without actually making plans to commit suicide. To prevent suicides, healthcare professionals need to understand the reasons why people have suicidal thoughts or display suicidal behaviour. While there are a number of psychometric, clinical and biological measures to detect suicide risk,[ 21-23] this risk in itself is difficult to measure and predict with high degrees of accuracy23 because of its multifactorial and multidimensional nature.
Suicide risk can be assessed by a variety of self-report and interviewer-administered measures. Selecting a self-report and/or a structured-interview format to measure suicidal symptoms is a critical decision. For example, although interviewer-administered measures may allow for greater flexibility for conducting appropriate assessments of suicidal behaviour, these measures usually require more time and expense (for administration and training) than self-report measures. In contrast, self-report questionnaires may be inadequate for measuring suicidality in cognitively impaired or highly emotional individuals with concentration difficulties, although findings in this regard are mixed.24 , 25 Although self-report measures are often used as screening tools, an adequate evaluation of suicidality should include both self-report and interviewer-administered measures.
Since its publication in
1974, Beck’s Hopelessness Scale (BHS) has become an
internationally-accepted and widely used measure in suicide
prevention.26 The scale has been extensively
researched and validated as a measure to predict suicide and
is still being used worldwide.27
,
28 Although depression,
hopelessness and suicide correlate closely, hopelessness was
identified as one of the most important psychological,
predictive and modifiable risk factors.27
,
28 In this context, the aim of the
present study was to construct a short, reliable and valid
instrument with high screening and clinical utility with which
to screen for suicide risk in recently diagnosed HIV-infected
persons at a voluntary counselling and testing (VCT) clinic in
Durban. This was intended to identify individuals whose
suicidal ideation was severe enough to warrant treatment and
suicide prevention.
Methods
Participants and setting
The sample consisted of 150 HIV-infected
adults, presenting for the first time to be tested for HIV at a
VCT clinic in an academic district-level hospital in Durban. All
participants who tested HIV-positive following VCT were informed
about the study by the resident VCT counsellor. Participants who
consented voluntarily were enrolled in the study and were asked
to complete the suicide risk screening scale (SRSS) and the
SUPRE-MISS instrument at baseline and three weeks later. The
study was approved by the Biomedical Research Ethics Committee
of the University of KwaZulu-Natal (BF202/09) and permission to
conduct the study was granted by the relevant health
institution.
Instruments
Two well-known and extensively used scales were utilised to assess aspects of suicidality in various population groups, viz. the BHS and the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI). Although these items do not directly assess suicidal behaviour, they measure hopelessness and immediate suicide risk. The BHS contains 20 true/false items (11 negatively and 9 positively phrased), with the severity of hopelessness (an indirect indicator of suicide risk) calculated by adding the scores for the 20 items. The total scores range from 0 (no hopelessness) to 20 (maximum level of hopelessness). The BDI, developed as a standardised measurement to assess the grades and severity of depression in order to monitor the change over time, contains 21 behavioural manifestations (items) of depression, which describe the symptoms from low to high. The items are scored individually from 0 to 3; these are added to obtain a total score of 0 - 63. A value <9 represents no or minimal depression, 17 - 29 moderate depression and >30 severe depression. Co-morbid conditions have been found to affect specificity of severity ratings at both the low- and high-end scores.27 Several researchers have used items from both scales to validate the use of shorter versions in specific populations.27 , 29 , 30
For the present study, 14 items were selected from these scales to construct the SRSS (Table 1). The 11 BHS items selected are negatively phrased questions that reflect expectations of failure or motivational components (items V2, V9, V11, V16, V17, V20) and future uncertainty or cognitive components (items V4, V7, V12, V14, V18). Item selection was based on patient responses in the related previous studies, by choosing those with the highest and lowest scores at the two time-points using the complete BHS and BDI.17 , 18 What the components measure has been addressed in other research.29 , 31
Our rationale for
item selection incorporated several additional considerations.
Firstly, patients with extreme pessimism would endorse the
negative items selected and thus be more likely to be scored to
have a higher suicide risk. 29
,
30 Secondly, the item-size pool is underscored by a theoretical
framework that the patients’ perceived hopelessness about
their situation and future could be linked to suicide risk.
This stems from the
premise that cognitions mainly centre around an uncertain
future and the loss of perspective in finding solutions to
problems, which lead to hopelessness and consequently to
suicidal ideation or attempt.26 In line with the BHS scoring,
the items of the SRSS were scored: true = 1; false = 0.
In the absence of a gold standard, an instrument previously tested in the general population in Durban was used as a proxy: the community survey aspect of SUPRE-MISS, based on the European Parasuicide Study Interview Schedule, which had been applied in the WHO/EURO Multicentre Study on Suicidal Behaviour.19 The following questions were asked: (i) ‘Have you ever seriously thought about committing suicide?’; (ii) ‘Have you ever made a plan for committing suicide?’; (iii) ‘Have you ever attempted suicide?’. The SUPRE-MISS instruments were pilot-tested, translated into different languages and validated. Since the SUPRE-MISS instrument was deemed reliable to predict suicidal behaviour, it was used as the reference to test the validity of the SRSS.
Statistical analysis
SPSS version 10.0 was used for data analysis.
Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analyses were used to
determine the sensitivity, specificity and optimal cut-off
points of the SRSS to predict suicidal ideation. Inter-item
characteristics, internal consistency, reliability and validity
analyses were also performed.
Results
The mean age of participants at baseline was
33.5 years (standard deviation (SD) ±9.4).
The cut-off points of the SRSS scores and their corresponding
sensitivity and specificity values are shown in Table 2. A
cut-off score of 4.5 (≥4 being a positive result) achieved 68%
sensitivity and 64% specificity in predicting suicidal ideation
and is therefore the recommended cut-off for the SRSS. In
establishing cut-off points on the SRSS that would optimise
sensitivity and specificity via ROC analysis, it was decided
that, ideally, the test should be more sensitive than specific
to identify as many probable suicidal patients as possible.
Sensitivity is paramount to suicide prediction and was our
rationale for maximising sensitivity in the present analysis.
The area under the curve (AUC) in ROC analysis was 0.730 at
baseline (95% CI 0.64 - 0.81) and 0.776 at three weeks (95% CI
0.68 - 0.87) (Figs 1 and 2, respectively).
Fig. 2 ROC curve of SRSS scores for suicidal ideation three weeks post-diagnosis in HIV-infected adults.
Inter-item characteristics and internal consistency
Table 3 displays the corrected item-total
correlation at baseline and three weeks later. The corrected
item total was >0.30 for all items except for V2 (‘I can’t
imagine what my life would be like in ten years’). This item had
a corrected item-total correlation of 0.333 at baseline and
0.277 three weeks later. Due to its potential for ambiguity in
some non-clinical samples, it has been described as an outlier;
in other studies it represented one of the highest-scoring item
responses at different time intervals.13
,
17
,
18 This apparent
discrepancy can be explained partially by considering various
factors. For example, for some patients, being told that they
have a positive HIV status can be an extremely stressful
experience that constitutes a life crisis. For many, their
psychological response can include the perception of ‘a death
image’,7
if they assume that they have been dealt a death sentence. This,
along with the myriad of possible other misconceptions,
cognitive distortions, psychiatric and life-disruption
complications,
a
shortage of
healthcare resources and the fear of not being eligible for, or
having access to ART,1 makes it difficult for
HIV-positive persons to visualise a long-term future.
The item-total correlations ranged from 0.318 to 0.675. At baseline, item V10 (‘The future seems vague and uncertain to me’) had the best corrected item total (0.675), while item V11 (‘There’s no use in really trying to get something I want because I probably won’t get it’) had the best corrected item total (0.802) at three weeks. The Cronbach’s alpha for a deleted item showed that none of the items were problematic. The level of internal consistency for the SRSS was, therefore, acceptable for clinical purposes and was consistent with the findings of other studies.27
Reliability and validity
The overall Cronbach’s alpha for the SRSS at
baseline and three weeks was 0.874 and 0.915, respectively. To
determine the validity of the SRSS, it was compared with the
accepted instrument for SUPRE-MISS. Using a cut-off score of 4,
the sensitivity for the SRSS at baseline was 81% with a positive
predictive value of 48%, a specificity of 47% and a negative
predictive value of 80%. At three weeks, the sensitivity was
79%, the specificity 55%, the positive predictive value 44%, and
the negative predictive value 82%.
Discussion
This study demonstrated the potential utility of a simple screening tool to detect suicidality in HIV-infected individuals newly diagnosed through a VCT programme. Although the sensitivity and specificity of the SRSS were not very high (around 68%), these compared favourably with those obtained in other research.26 , 29 Unlike other studies, where item 7 or the 4 items of the BHS were not administered individually, in our study the full version of the BHS was administered and the responses to the 20 items were used to deduce final scores.29 Notably, there was a likelihood of a high level of false-positives through the use of the SRSS. The results indicate a good sensitivity at both time-periods and a comparatively low rate of false-positives. Further research and the incorporation of additional assessment items in the questionnaire are likely to have a more successful result in suicide prevention.
Equally important for screening instruments to be effective is the prevalence of risk within the population. It is well documented that SA – especially the city of Durban, where the research was conducted – has a high prevalence of HIV/AIDS, and a recent study showed that sero-positivity, age and gender were significantly associated with suicidal ideation.17 , 18 It can therefore be concluded that the SRSS can be used, in conjunction with a clinical interview, as a valid screening instrument to assess for suicide risk in this setting. The use of a clinical interview, which remains the fundamental basis of suicide risk assessment, should incorporate an understanding of the patient’s suicidal crisis from both an objective/descriptive as well as an experiential perspective.23-25 The former includes objective patient data to assess suicide risk, a clinical (psychiatric/psychological) history and identification of overt suicidal manifestations and risk factors.23-25 The latter perspective goes beyond delineation of clinical symptoms in an attempt to understand the patient’s actual feelings, personal narrative, perspective, sustaining resources and beliefs about suicide.23-25
The assessment of hopelessness is extremely important in clinical practice, since high levels of hopelessness can lead to isolation and the inhibition to seek help timeously. Given this, VCT offers patients an option to be counselled and tested for the presence of HIV and, at the same time, provides an opportunity to identify any underlying level of hopelessness and suicide risk related to receiving a life-altering diagnosis of HIV-positivity.17 , 18 The self-administered questionnaire can be completed while patients are awaiting their HIV test results. The questionnaire is easily scored and a risk assessment is performed with relative ease. A suicide intervention to be included in the post-test counselling is presently being evaluated, including re-administering the SRSS at the next clinical visit. This may decrease the rate of false-positives obtained.
Study limitations
The construction of the SRSS involved
selecting items from two sub-scales, which were grouped and
analysed as a single scale. The main limitation of this study
was that there was no gold standard to use as a baseline
reference within the context of the population studied.
Furthermore, there was no reference to the participants’ views
on living with HIV, which can be part of a clinical interview;
this should form the focus of further research.
Conclusion
Analyses have demonstrated the importance of brief scales with high clinical validity for assessing suicidal risk in daily clinic settings.21 , 22 Our research shows that the SRSS can be a valuable screening tool for suicidality as part of a standard clinical interview and good clinical assessment in HIV/AIDS VCT clinics. Suicide risk assessment in patients seen at such clinics should be a routine aspect of comprehensive patient care, to assist with effective management and the prevention of possible suicidal behaviour. The SRSS is not intended as a stand-alone diagnostic tool to assess suicidal behaviour, but may be used as a triage tool to assist in the identification of high-risk patients.
Acknowledgements. We
thank Prenisha Pillay for research assistance and Mrs T
Esterhuizen for statistical assistance. RDG was supported by the Columbia
University/South African Fogarty AIDS International Training
and Research Programme (AITRP) funded by the Fogarty
International Center, National Institutes of Health (grant
D43TW00231).
References
1. Schlebusch L, Vawda N. HIV-infection as a self-reported risk factor for attempted suicide in South Africa. Afr J Psych 2010;13(4):280-283.
2. Bertolote JM, Fleischmann A, De Leo D, et al. Suicidal thoughts, suicide plans and attempts in the general population on different continents. In: Wasserman D, Wasserman C, eds. Oxford Textbook of Suicidology and Suicide Prevention. A Global Perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009:99-104.
3. World Health Organization. Suicide Prevention (SUPRE). Geneva: WHO, 2012. http://www.who.int/mental_health/prevention/suicide/country_reports/en/index.html (accessed 22 April 2013).
4. Burrows S, Laflamme L. Suicide mortality in South Africa. Soc Psych Psych Epi 2006;41(2):108-111. [http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00127-005-0004-4]
5. Joe S, Stein DJ, Seedat S, et al. Non-fatal suicidal behavior among South Africans: Results from the South Africa Stress and Health Study. Soc Psych Psych Epi 2009;43(6):454-461. [http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00127-008-0348-7]
6. Donson H. Suicide. In: Matzopoulos R, ed. A Profile of Fatal Injuries in South Africa: Ninth Annual Report of the National Injury Mortality Surveillance System. Tygerberg: MRC- UNISA, 2008:31-34.
7. Schlebusch L. Suicidal Behaviour in South Africa. Pietermaritzburg: University of KwaZulu-Natal Press, 2005.
8. Reddy SP, Panday S, Swart D, et al. Umthenthe Uhlaba Usamila – The South Africa Youth Risk Behaviour Survey. Cape Town: South African Medical Research Council, 2002.
9. Catalan J, Harding R, Sibley E, et al. HIV infection and mental health: Suicidal behaviour – systematic review. Psychol Health Med 2011;16(5):588-611. [http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13548506.2011.582125]
10. Badiee J, Moore DJ, Atkinson JH, et al. Lifetime suicidal ideation and attempt are common among HIV+ individuals. J Affect Disorders 2012;136(3):993-999. [http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2011.06.044]
11. Ciesla GR, Roberts JE. Meta-analysis of the relationship between HIV infection and risk for depressive disorders. Am J Psychiatry 2001;158:725-730.
12. Olley BO, Seedat S, Nei DG, et al. Predictors of major depression in recently diagnosed patients with HIV/AIDS in South Africa. AIDS Patient Car STDs 2004;18:481-487. [http://dx.doi.org/10.1089/1087291041703700]
13. Govender RD, Schlebusch L. Hopelessness, depression and suicidal ideation in HIV-positive persons. South African Journal of Pyschiatry 2012;18(1):17-21.
14. Meel BL. Suicide in HIV/AIDS in Transkei, South Africa. Anil Aggrawal's Internet J Foren Med and Toxicol 2003;4(1):1-9.
15. Meel BL, Leenaars AA. Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and suicide in a region of Eastern Province ("Transkei"), South Africa. Arch Suicide Res 2005;9(1):69-75.
16. Rochat TJ, Bland RM, Tomlinson M, Stein A. Suicide ideation, depression and HIV among pregnant women in rural South Africa. Health 2013;5(3A):650-661. [http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/health.2013.53A086]
17. Govender RD, Schlebusch L. Suicidal ideation in seropositive patients seen at a South African HIV voluntary counseling and testing clinic. Afr J Psych 2012;15:94-98. [http://dx.doi.org/10.4314/ajpsy.v15i2.12]
18. Schlebusch L, Govender RD. Age, gender and suicidal ideation following voluntary HIV counseling and testing. Int J of Enviro Res Pub Health 2012;9:521-530. [http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph9020521]
19. Bertolote JM, Fleischmann A, De Leo D, et al. Suicidal attempts, plans and ideation in culturally diverse sites: The WHO SUPRE-MISS community survey. Psychol Med 2005;35:1457-1465. [http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0033291705005404]
20. Carrico AW. Elevated suicide rate among HIV-positive persons despite benefits of antiretroviral therapy: Implications for a stress and coping model of suicide. Am J Psychiatry 2010;167:117-119. [http://dx.doi.org/10.1176/appi.ajp.2009.09111565]
21. Bech P, Awata S. Measurement of suicidal behaviour with psychometric scales. In: Wasserman D, Wasserman C, eds. Oxford Textbook of Suicidology and Suicide Prevention. A Global Perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009:305-311.
22. Mann JJ, Currier D. Biological predictors of suicidal behaviour in mood disorders. In: Wasserman D, Wasserman C, eds. Oxford Textbook of Suicidology and Suicide Prevention. A Global Perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009:331-339.
23. Bantjies J, Van Ommen C. The development and utilisation of a suicide risk assessment interview schedule. S Afr J Psychol 2008;38(2):391-411. [http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/008124630803800210]
24. Eddins CL, Jobes DA. Do you see what I see? Patient and clinician perceptions of underlying dimensions of suicidality. Suicide Life Threat Behav 1994;24(2):170-173.
25. Kaplan ML, Asnis GM, Sanderson WC, et al. Suicide assessment: Clinical interview vs. self-report. J Clin Psychol 1994;50(2):294-298. [http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/1097-4679(199403)50:2<294::AID-JCLP2270500224>3.0.CO;2-R]
26. Beck AT, Weissman A, Lester D, et al. The measurement of pessimism: The Hopelessness scale. J Consult Clin Psych 1974;42:861-865.
27. Forintos DP, Sallai J. Adaptation of the Beck Hopelessness Scale in Hungary. Psychol Topics 2010;19(2):307-321.
28. Perry AE, Olason DT. A New Psychometric Instrument Assessing Vulnerability to Risk of Suicide and Self-Harm Behaviour in Offenders: Suicide Concerns for Offenders in Prison Environment (SCOPE). Int J Offender Ther Comp Criminol 2009;53:385. [http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0306624X08319418]
29. American Psychiatric Association (APA). Handbook of Psychiatric Measures. Washington, DC: APA, 2000.
30. Yip PSF, Cheung YB. Quick assessment of hopelessness: a cross-sectional study. Health Qual Life Out 2006;4(13). [http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1477-7525-4-13]
31. Aish AM, Wasserman D. Does Beck’s Hopelessness Scale really measure several components? Psychol Med 2001;31:367-272. [http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0033291701003300]