Keele Research Repository

Haris, AM, Pitman, A, Mughal, F ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5437-5962, Bakanaite, E, Morant, N and Rowe, SL (2022) Harm minimisation for self-harm: a cross-sectional survey of British clinicians’ perspectives and practises. BMJ Open, 12 (6). e056199 - e056199.

Preview

Text e056199.full.pdf - Published Version Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial. Download (734kB) | Preview

Abstract

<jats:sec><jats:title>Objective</jats:title><jats:p>Harm minimisation for self-harm is an alternative to preventive strategies and focuses on maximising safety when self-harming. We explored the views of clinicians on harm minimisation for self-harm to describe reported use and acceptability in clinical practice.</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>Design</jats:title><jats:p>A cross-sectional study using an online survey consisting of fixed-choice and open-ended questions.</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>Setting</jats:title><jats:p>Primary and secondary care practices in England, Scotland and Wales.</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>Participants</jats:title><jats:p>Snowball sampling of UK-based clinicians (n=90; 67% female) working with people who self-harm and who have or have not previously recommended harm minimisation methods to patients.</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>Results</jats:title><jats:p>Of the 90 clinicians sampled, 76 (84%) reported having recommended harm minimisation techniques to people in their care who self-harm. Commonly recommended techniques were snapping rubber bands on one’s wrist and squeezing ice. Other techniques, such as teaching use of clean instruments when self-harming, were less likely to be recommended. Perceived client benefits included harm reduction and promotion of the therapeutic relationship. Perceived potential limitations of a harm minimisation approach for self-harm were (a) potential worsening of self-harm outcomes; (b) ethical reservations; (c) doubts about its effectiveness and appropriateness; and (d) lack of training and clear policies within the workplace.</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>Conclusions</jats:title><jats:p>In our sample of UK-based clinicians in various settings, harm minimisation for self-harm was broadly recommended for clients who self-harm due to perceived client benefits. However, future policies on harm minimisation must address clinicians’ perceived needs for training, well-defined guidelines, and clear evidence of effectiveness and safety to mitigate some clinician concerns about the potential for further harm.</jats:p></jats:sec>

Item Type:	Article
Additional Information:	This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial.
Subjects:	R Medicine > R Medicine (General)
Divisions:	Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences > School of Medicine
Depositing User:	Symplectic
Date Deposited:	20 Jun 2022 10:30
Last Modified:	20 Jun 2022 10:30
URI:	https://eprints.keele.ac.uk/id/eprint/11026

Actions (login required)

View Item