The British Journal of Psychiatry (2007) 191: 458. doi: 10.1192/bjp.191.5.458b
© 2007 The Royal College of Psychiatrists
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit an eLetter
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via CrossRef
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Kripalani, M.
Right arrow Articles by Morris, S.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Kripalani, M.
Right arrow Articles by Morris, S.

Correspondence

Factors in those who repeatedly self-harm

M. Kripalani

Bath Villa Annex, St Luke’s Hospital, Middlesbrough, UK. Email: drmukesh{at}doctors.org.uk

R. Badanapuram, A. Gash and S. Morris

St Luke’s Hospital, Middlesbrough, UK

EDITED BY KIRIAKOS XENITIDIS and COLIN CAMPBELL

We read with interest the article on young people who self-harm (Young et al, 2007) but feel the outcome of factors considered would have been more viable if a further subgroup analysis was performed in those patients who repeatedly self-harm. A significant amount of our time is taken up by people who self-harm repeatedly. This subset of clients are often entrenched in their behaviour patterns and use services disproportionately. Existing studies have not adequately analysed factors responsible for repetition of self-harm and we feel that Young et al missed an excellent opportunity to investigate this, albeit in a younger age-group.

An analysis of our data from the Integrated Care Pathway (Rajwal & Gash, 2006) showed repetition rates of 40% for 2004, 42% for 2005 and 43% for 2006 of all our referrals each year. This means that 18% of our patients in 2004, 18.9% in 2005 and 19.2% in 2006 were responsible for the above statistics year on year. These data are from adults of working age and only include repetition in the same calendar year. About 13% of our referrals are under 21, and 18% of those are for repetitions of self-harm. Hence a small proportion of our clients are responsible for a large proportion of our work.

Our data support Young et al on the lack of a gender bias in the prevalence of self-harm. Females comprised 50.2% of our referrals in 2006 but only 49.0% of those repeating self-harm. The old myth of a higher proportion of females self-harming was not borne out by our statistics, although we considered the entire adult age-group.

We would be interested to know whether the results of Young et al would be different in the subgroup with repeated self-harm.

REFERENCES

  1. Rajwal, M. & Gash, A. (2006) Risk assessment in self-harm. Psychiatric Bulletin, 30, 436.[Free Full Text]
  2. Young, R., Van Beinum, M., Sweeting, H., et al (2007) Young people who self-harm. British Journal of Psychiatry, 191, 44 –49.[Abstract/Free Full Text]




This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit an eLetter
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via CrossRef
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Kripalani, M.
Right arrow Articles by Morris, S.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Kripalani, M.
Right arrow Articles by Morris, S.