4.2 Article

Epidemiology of Suicide and Associated Socio-Demographic Factors in Emergency Department Patients in 7 General Hospitals in Northwestern China

期刊

MEDICAL SCIENCE MONITOR
卷 21, 期 -, 页码 2743-2749

出版社

INT SCIENTIFIC INFORMATION, INC
DOI: 10.12659/MSM.894819

关键词

Epidemiology; Suicide; Tertiary Prevention

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: This study aimed to illustrate the characteristics of suicide attempters treated in the Emergency Departments of 7 general hospitals in Xi'an and to provide relevant data for early psychological treatment. Material/ Methods: Between October 2010 and September 2014, 155 suicide attempters were treated in the Emergency Departments. Data were collected using a semi-structured questionnaire. Descriptive statistics, chi-square tests, and multivariate analyses were used to identify the factors associated with suicidal behaviors. Results: Females outnumbered males at a ratio of 3.7 to 1. The greatest proportion of cases was in the age group of 21 to 30 years (52.9%). Patients who finished middle school or high school accounted for most of the suicide attempters (50.3%). The most common method used for attempted suicide was drug ingestion (86.5%). The majority of cases attempted suicide at home (74.8%) during the night. Marriage frustration, work and study problems, family fanaticism and conflict, somatic disease, and history of mental disorders were all significantly associated with suicide attempts. The ratio of patients to be discharged or to die were similar in occupation, marital status, and the place of suicide attempt; however, the results were different in gender, age, educational level, methods used for suicide, time of day, and reason. Conclusions: Suicide is an important public health problem and is multidimensional in nature. Future studies with larger samples are expected to provide more specific knowledge of the effect of each social factor on the suicide risk in Chinese in order to improve the prevention of suicides.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据