Skip to content

Safety Planning in Juvenile Justice for Suicidal Youth

Screening and Brief Intervention for Suicidality and Nonsuicidal Self-Injury Among Youth in the Juvenile Justice System

Status
Completed
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT03655470
Acronym
Safety
Enrollment
59
Registered
2018-08-31
Start date
2019-01-01
Completion date
2022-12-01
Last updated
2024-11-12

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Nonsuicidal Self-injury, Suicidal Ideation, Suicide, Attempted

Keywords

suicidal behavior, nonsuicidal self injury, adolescents

Brief summary

This study will examine the feasibility and acceptability of a program designed to conduct safety planning with youth in the juvenile justice system who are at risk for a suicide attempt and/or self-injury and to increase the possibility of them receiving outpatient mental health treatment. After training staff in the intervention, the investigators will pilot test the safety planning intervention and gather information on how well it worked on reducing self-harm, getting families to follow up with referrals for mental health care, and how often they attend treatment.

Detailed description

The Juvenile Justice System (JJS) has not implemented any evidenced-based interventions that address suicidal behavior or nonsuicidal self-injury, hereafter referred collectively to as self-injury, with JJS-involved youth. This application proposes to test a scalable intervention, safety planning, that aims to reduce self-injury in adolescents involved in the JJS. Safety planning, which can be a stand-alone brief intervention, was cited as a best practice by the Suicide Prevention Resource Center/American Foundation for Suicide Prevention Best Practices Registry for Suicide Prevention. This study will have two phases. In Phase I, the investigators will conduct an open trial with 10 adolescents which will allow us to make any modifications necessary for using the protocol in a Probation Department. The investigators will then randomize 60 youth on Probation who screen positive for recent self-injury into standard care or the safety planning intervention. Counselors with community mental health experience embedded in Probation will conduct the intervention, consistent with the co-responder model found across JJS in the U.S. in which a Probation Officer works collaboratively with a mental health professional to coordinate care. In order to further conduct the study under conditions most relevant to a future implementation trial, the investigators will also employ a training approach that has been successfully implemented in a psychiatric hospital with Bachelors and Masters level staff. In Phase II, of the study, the investigators will: a) conduct qualitative interviews in Probation about attitudes toward the intervention as well as barriers to a future, larger implementation trial; and b) contract with the National Center for Mental Health and Juvenile Justice to conduct a Sequential Intercept Model (SIM) Mapping. The SIM is a conceptual framework to outline a series of points of interception along the JJS continuum in a state where screening and brief intervention may be implemented. In the Mapping, the investigators will examine the JJS continuum from arrest; to an initial hearing; to jail awaiting trial or adjudication; incarceration; to release or reentry; and finally, to community supervision. These data will provide a working framework to help assess current views within the statewide JJS as a starting point to proposing a future, larger trial. This research also has the potential to directly inform treatment practices in JJ settings and has significant implications for scalability and dissemination in order to build a stronger, more effective system of mental health/JJS collaboration around self-injury screening and intervention.

Interventions

BEHAVIORALSafety Planning

Safety planning is an individual coping intervention to reduce suicidal risk in adolescents

BEHAVIORALStandard care

Standard care entails sending an adolescent for an emergency evaluation for suicidal risk in an Emergency Department

Sponsors

National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH)
CollaboratorNIH
The Miriam Hospital
CollaboratorOTHER
Brown University
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
SINGLE (Outcomes Assessor)

Masking description

Outcome assessors will be blind; participants will not be told to what condition they are assigned

Intervention model description

2 group randomized controlled trial

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
12 Years to 18 Years
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

* Legal guardian available to consent for juvenile's participation * Juvenile and parents are English or Spanish speaking * Juvenile flags in on the screening measure used in court with respect to suicidal ideation or nonsuicidal self-injury.

Exclusion criteria

* None

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Change in Suicidal IdeationPast month ideation at 1 and 3 month follow-up pointsScore on Suicidal Ideation Questionnaire; higher is worse; range 0 to180

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Suicide Attempts3 monthsWhether a participant reported a suicide attempt

Countries

United States

Participant flow

Participants by arm

ArmCount
Safety Planning
This brief intervention, consists of an in-person and follow-up phone call that are based on cognitive behavioral principles designed to help identify a concrete list of coping strategies and social supports that youth can utilize preceding or during a crisis to lower imminent risk of nonsuicidal self-injury or suicidal behavior. Safety Planning: Safety planning is an individual coping intervention to reduce suicidal risk in adolescents
29
Standard Care
If a teen has a positive screen for suicide risk, the Probation Officer completes a secondary screener built into the court screening instrument to determine whether there is concern of current and/or imminent risk. If a teen endorses nonsuicidal self-injury more than once in the prior year, then the Probation Officer asks about frequency and severity. If there is ongoing concern of risk for self-injurious behavior, then the Probation Officer arranges for a crisis evaluation in the Emergency Department. If the teen is not judged to be at imminent risk, the Probation Officer makes a referral back to the current treatment provider or to a community mental health clinic. In either case, the parents and youth receive a packet with mental health resources Standard care: Standard care entails sending an adolescent for an emergency evaluation for suicidal risk in an Emergency Department
30
Total59

Withdrawals & dropouts

PeriodReasonFG000FG001
Overall StudyLost to Follow-up67

Baseline characteristics

CharacteristicSafety PlanningStandard CareTotal
Age, Continuous14.75 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 1.35
15.07 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 1.58
14.93 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 1.46
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
Hispanic or Latino
10 Participants8 Participants18 Participants
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
Not Hispanic or Latino
19 Participants22 Participants41 Participants
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
Unknown or Not Reported
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants
Massachusetts Youth Screening Instrument - Angry/Irritable subscale,4.21 units on a scale
STANDARD_DEVIATION 2.9
4.73 units on a scale
STANDARD_DEVIATION 3.07
4.47 units on a scale
STANDARD_DEVIATION 2.97
Race (NIH/OMB)
American Indian or Alaska Native
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
Asian
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
Black or African American
3 Participants6 Participants9 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
More than one race
6 Participants5 Participants11 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
Unknown or Not Reported
8 Participants4 Participants12 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
White
12 Participants15 Participants27 Participants
Region of Enrollment
United States
29 participants30 participants59 participants
Sex: Female, Male
Female
13 Participants8 Participants21 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Male
16 Participants22 Participants38 Participants

Adverse events

Event typeEG000
affected / at risk
EG001
affected / at risk
deaths
Total, all-cause mortality
0 / 290 / 30
other
Total, other adverse events
0 / 290 / 30
serious
Total, serious adverse events
0 / 290 / 30

Outcome results

Primary

Change in Suicidal Ideation

Score on Suicidal Ideation Questionnaire; higher is worse; range 0 to180

Time frame: Past month ideation at 1 and 3 month follow-up points

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Safety PlanningChange in Suicidal Ideation1-month follow-up12.27 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 17.57
Safety PlanningChange in Suicidal IdeationBaseline SIQ8.90 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 12.19
Safety PlanningChange in Suicidal Ideation3-month follow-up10.15 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 14.81
Standard CareChange in Suicidal IdeationBaseline SIQ8.97 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 14.37
Standard CareChange in Suicidal Ideation1-month follow-up7.36 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 15.54
Standard CareChange in Suicidal Ideation3-month follow-up4.54 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 7.38
p-value: 0.3Mixed Models Analysis
Secondary

Suicide Attempts

Whether a participant reported a suicide attempt

Time frame: 3 months

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
Safety PlanningSuicide Attempts0 Participants
Standard CareSuicide Attempts0 Participants

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026