Abstract
The prevalence of self-harm has increased substantially in recent decades. Despite the development of guidelines for better management and prevention of self-harm, service users report that quality of care remains variable. A previous systematic review of research published to June 2006 documented largely negative experiences of clinical services among patients who self-harm. We reviewed research papers published since then until July 2022 to examine contemporary attitudes towards clinical and non-clinical services among individuals who self-harm and their relatives. We identified 29 studies meeting inclusion criteria, all of which were from high- or middle-income countries and were generally of high methodological quality. Our narrative synthesis identified negative attitudes towards clinical management and organisational barriers across services. Generally, more positive attitudes were found towards non-clinical services providing therapeutic contact, such as voluntary sector organisations and social services, than clinical services, such as emergency departments and inpatient units. Views suggested that negative experiences of service provision may perpetuate a cycle of self-harm. Our review suggests that in recent years there has been little improvement in experiences of services for patients who self-harm. These findings should be used to reform clinical guidelines and staff training across clinical services to promote patient-centred and compassionate care and deliver more effective, acceptable and accessible services.
Competing Interest Statement
AP is a Patron of the Support After Suicide Partnership. KH is a member of the National Suicide Prevention Strategy for England Advisory Group and is a National Institute for Health Research Senior Investigator (Emeritus).
Funding Statement
AP and SR are supported by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) University College London Hospital (UCLH) Biomedical Research Centre (BRC).
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
Published papers or grey literature
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
All data are in the public domain
