Interventions to reduce suicides at suicide hotspots: a systematic review
1 Orygen Youth Health Research Centre, Centre for Youth Mental Health, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia
2 University of Exeter Medical School, Exeter, UK
3 Centre for Health Policy, Programs and Economics, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia
BMC Public Health 2013, 13:214 doi:10.1186/1471-2458-13-214Published: 9 March 2013
‘Suicide hotspots’ include tall structures (for example, bridges and cliffs), railway tracks, and isolated locations (for example, rural car parks) which offer direct means for suicide or seclusion that prevents intervention.
We searched Medline for studies that could inform the following question: ‘What interventions are available to reduce suicides at hotspots, and are they effective?’
There are four main approaches: (a) restricting access to means (through installation of physical barriers); (b) encouraging help-seeking (by placement of signs and telephones); (c) increasing the likelihood of intervention by a third party (through surveillance and staff training); and (d) encouraging responsible media reporting of suicide (through guidelines for journalists). There is relatively strong evidence that reducing access to means can avert suicides at hotspots without substitution effects. The evidence is weaker for the other approaches, although they show promise.
More well-designed intervention studies are needed to strengthen this evidence base.