Overview

Suicide is a major, preventable public health problem, and healthcare professionals may encounter individuals at risk in a variety of clinical settings. Recognizing warning signs and risk factors, initiating appropriate conversations about suicidal thoughts, and accurately assessing the severity of suicide risk are essential skills for timely intervention. This course reviews the recognition and assessment of suicide risk, including warning signs, suicidal ideation, plans, intent, previous suicidal behavior, and access to lethal means. It also examines approaches to determining the level of acute risk and selecting appropriate interventions, including referral, hospitalization, safety planning, lethal-means restriction, continuity of care, and evidence-based treatment strategies. Particular attention is given to the needs of military service members and veterans, as well as considerations for healthcare professionals themselves.

Education Category: Psychiatric / Mental Health
Release Date: 10/01/2026
Expiration Date: 09/30/2029

Table of Contents

Audience

This course is designed for members of the interprofessional healthcare team who may identify persons at risk for suicide and intervene to prevent or manage suicidality.

Accreditations & Approvals

In support of improving patient care, TRC Healthcare/NetCE is jointly accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education (ACCME), the Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education (ACPE), and the American Nurses Credentialing Center (ANCC), to provide continuing education for the healthcare team. NetCE has been approved by NBCC as an Approved Continuing Education Provider, ACEP No. 6361. Programs that do not qualify for NBCC credit are clearly identified. NetCE is solely responsible for all aspects of the programs. As a Jointly Accredited Organization, NetCE is approved to offer social work continuing education by the Association of Social Work Boards (ASWB) Approved Continuing Education (ACE) program. Organizations, not individual courses, are approved under this program. Regulatory boards are the final authority on courses accepted for continuing education credit. Continuing Education (CE) credits for psychologists are provided through the co-sponsorship of the American Psychological Association (APA) Office of Continuing Education in Psychology (CEP). The APA CEP Office maintains responsibility for the content of the programs. NetCE is accredited by the International Accreditors for Continuing Education and Training (IACET). NetCE complies with the ANSI/IACET Standard, which is recognized internationally as a standard of excellence in instructional practices. As a result of this accreditation, NetCE is authorized to issue the IACET CEU. NetCE is recognized by the New York State Education Department's State Board for Social Work as an approved provider of continuing education for licensed social workers #SW-0033. This course is considered self-study, as defined by the New York State Board for Social Work. NetCE is recognized by the New York State Education Department's State Board for Mental Health Practitioners as an approved provider of continuing education for licensed mental health counselors #MHC-0021. This course is considered self-study by the New York State Board of Mental Health Counseling. NetCE is recognized by the New York State Education Department's State Board for Mental Health Practitioners as an approved provider of continuing education for licensed marriage and family therapists. #MFT-0015.This course is considered self-study by the New York State Board of Marriage and Family Therapy. Materials that are included in this course may include interventions and modalities that are beyond the authorized practice of licensed master social work and licensed clinical social work in New York. As a licensed professional, you are responsible for reviewing the scope of practice, including activities that are defined in law as beyond the boundaries of practice for an LMSW and LCSW. A licensee who practices beyond the authorized scope of practice could be charged with unprofessional conduct under the Education Law and Regents Rules.

Designations of Credit

This activity was planned by and for the healthcare team, and learners will receive 1 Interprofessional Continuing Education (IPCE) credit(s) for learning and change. NetCE designates this enduring material for a maximum of 1 AMA PRA Category 1 Credit(s)™. Physicians should claim only the credit commensurate with the extent of their participation in the activity. NetCE designates this continuing education activity for 1 ANCC contact hour(s). NetCE designates this continuing education activity for 1.2 hours for Alabama nurses. NetCE designates this continuing education activity for 1 NBCC clock hour(s). Social workers participating in this intermediate to advanced course will receive 1 Clinical continuing education clock hours. Successful completion of this CME activity, which includes participation in the evaluation component, enables the participant to earn up to 1 MOC points in the American Board of Internal Medicine's (ABIM) Maintenance of Certification (MOC) program. Participants will earn MOC points equivalent to the amount of CME credits claimed for the activity. It is the CME activity provider's responsibility to submit participant completion information to ACCME for the purpose of granting ABIM MOC credit. Completion of this course constitutes permission to share the completion data with ACCME. Successful completion of this CME activity, which includes participation in the evaluation component, enables the learner to earn credit toward the CME and/or Self-Assessment requirements of the American Board of Surgery's Continuous Certification program. It is the CME activity provider's responsibility to submit learner completion information to ACCME for the purpose of granting ABS credit. This activity has been approved for the American Board of Anesthesiology’s® (ABA) requirements for Part II: Lifelong Learning and Self-Assessment of the American Board of Anesthesiology’s (ABA) redesigned Maintenance of Certification in Anesthesiology Program® (MOCA®), known as MOCA 2.0®. Please consult the ABA website, www.theABA.org, for a list of all MOCA 2.0 requirements. Maintenance of Certification in Anesthesiology Program® and MOCA® are registered certification marks of the American Board of Anesthesiology®. MOCA 2.0® is a trademark of the American Board of Anesthesiology®. Successful completion of this CME activity, which includes participation in the activity with individual assessments of the participant and feedback to the participant, enables the participant to earn 1 MOC points in the American Board of Pediatrics' (ABP) Maintenance of Certification (MOC) program. It is the CME activity provider's responsibility to submit participant completion information to ACCME for the purpose of granting ABP MOC credit. This activity has been designated for 1 Lifelong Learning (Part II) credits for the American Board of Pathology Continuing Certification Program. Through an agreement between the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education and the Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada, medical practitioners participating in the Royal College MOC Program may record completion of accredited activities registered under the ACCME's "CME in Support of MOC" program in Section 3 of the Royal College's MOC Program. AACN Synergy CERP Category A. NetCE designates this continuing education activity for 1 credit(s). NetCE is authorized by IACET to offer 0.1 CEU(s) for this program.

Individual State Nursing Approvals

In addition to states that accept ANCC, NetCE is approved as a provider of continuing education in nursing by: Alabama, Provider #ABNP0353 (valid through July 30, 2029); Arkansas, Provider #50-2405; California, BRN Provider #CEP9784; California, LVN Provider #V10662; California, PT Provider #V10842; District of Columbia, Provider #50-2405; Florida, Provider #50-2405; Georgia, Provider #50-2405; Kentucky, Provider #7-0054 through 12/31/2027; South Carolina, Provider #50-2405; West Virginia RN and APRN, Provider #50-2405.

Individual State Behavioral Health Approvals

In addition to states that accept ASWB, NetCE is approved as a provider of continuing education by the following state boards: Alabama State Board of Social Work Examiners, Provider #0515; Florida Board of Clinical Social Work, Marriage and Family Therapy and Mental Health Counseling, CE Broker Provider #50-2405; Illinois Division of Professional Regulation for Social Workers, License #159.001094; Illinois Division of Professional Regulation for Licensed Professional and Clinical Counselors, License #197.000185; Illinois Division of Professional Regulation for Marriage and Family Therapists, License #168.000190;

Special Approvals

This activity is designed to comply with the requirements of California Assembly Bill 1195, Cultural and Linguistic Competency.

Course Objective

The purpose of this course is to provide health and mental health professionals with an appreciation of the impact of depression and suicide on patient health as well as the skills necessary to identify and intervene for patients at risk for suicide.

Learning Objectives

Upon completion of this course, you should be able to:

  1. Identify warning signs, risk factors, and protective factors associated with suicidal thoughts and behaviors, including indicators of an imminent suicide crisis.
  2. Apply appropriate approaches to screening and assessing suicide risk, including evaluation of suicidal ideation, plans, intent, previous suicidal behavior, access to lethal means, and factors that influence the level of acute risk.
  3. Describe evidence-based strategies for managing and preventing suicide, including safety planning, lethal-means restriction, referral and hospitalization, continuity of care, and appropriate follow-up.

Faculty

Mark Rose, BS, MA, LP, is a licensed psychologist in the State of Minnesota with a private consulting practice and a medical research analyst with a biomedical communications firm. Earlier healthcare technology assessment work led to medical device and pharmaceutical sector experience in new product development involving cancer ablative devices and pain therapeutics. Along with substantial experience in addiction research, Mr. Rose has contributed to the authorship of numerous papers on CNS, oncology, and other medical disorders. He is the lead author of papers published in peer-reviewed addiction, psychiatry, and pain medicine journals and has written books on prescription opioids and alcoholism published by the Hazelden Foundation. He also serves as an Expert Advisor and Expert Witness to law firms that represent disability claimants or criminal defendants on cases related to chronic pain, psychiatric/substance use disorders, and acute pharmacologic/toxicologic effects. Mr. Rose is on the Board of Directors of the Minneapolis-based International Institute of Anti-Aging Medicine and is a member of several professional organizations.

Faculty Disclosure

Contributing faculty, Mark Rose, BS, MA, LP, has disclosed no relevant financial relationship with any product manufacturer or service provider mentioned.

Division Planner

Margaret Donohue, PhD

Division Planner Disclosure

The division planner has disclosed no relevant financial relationship with any product manufacturer or service provider mentioned.

Director of Development and Academic Affairs

Sarah Campbell

Director Disclosure Statement

The Director of Development and Academic Affairs has disclosed no relevant financial relationship with any product manufacturer or service provider mentioned.

About the Sponsor

The purpose of NetCE is to provide challenging curricula to assist healthcare professionals to raise their levels of expertise while fulfilling their continuing education requirements, thereby improving the quality of healthcare.

Our contributing faculty members have taken care to ensure that the information and recommendations are accurate and compatible with the standards generally accepted at the time of publication. The publisher disclaims any liability, loss or damage incurred as a consequence, directly or indirectly, of the use and application of any of the contents. Participants are cautioned about the potential risk of using limited knowledge when integrating new techniques into practice.

Disclosure Statement

It is the policy of NetCE not to accept commercial support. Furthermore, commercial interests are prohibited from distributing or providing access to this activity to learners.

Technical Requirements

Supported browsers for Windows include Microsoft Internet Explorer 9.0 and up, Mozilla Firefox 3.0 and up, Opera 9.0 and up, and Google Chrome. Supported browsers for Macintosh include Safari, Mozilla Firefox 3.0 and up, Opera 9.0 and up, and Google Chrome. Other operating systems and browsers that include complete implementations of ECMAScript edition 3 and CSS 2.0 may work, but are not supported. Supported browsers must utilize the TLS encryption protocol v1.1 or v1.2 in order to connect to pages that require a secured HTTPS connection. TLS v1.0 is not supported.

Implicit Bias in Health Care

The role of implicit biases on healthcare outcomes has become a concern, as there is some evidence that implicit biases contribute to health disparities, professionals' attitudes toward and interactions with patients, quality of care, diagnoses, and treatment decisions. This may produce differences in help-seeking, diagnoses, and ultimately treatments and interventions. Implicit biases may also unwittingly produce professional behaviors, attitudes, and interactions that reduce patients' trust and comfort with their provider, leading to earlier termination of visits and/or reduced adherence and follow-up. Disadvantaged groups are marginalized in the healthcare system and vulnerable on multiple levels; health professionals' implicit biases can further exacerbate these existing disadvantages.

Interventions or strategies designed to reduce implicit bias may be categorized as change-based or control-based. Change-based interventions focus on reducing or changing cognitive associations underlying implicit biases. These interventions might include challenging stereotypes. Conversely, control-based interventions involve reducing the effects of the implicit bias on the individual's behaviors. These strategies include increasing awareness of biased thoughts and responses. The two types of interventions are not mutually exclusive and may be used synergistically.

#96370: Suicide Recognition, Response, and Intervention

INTRODUCTION

Suicide is a major, preventable public health problem, and healthcare professionals may encounter individuals at risk in a variety of clinical settings. Recognizing warning signs and risk factors, initiating appropriate conversations about suicidal thoughts, and accurately assessing the severity of suicide risk are essential skills for timely intervention. This course reviews the recognition and assessment of suicide risk, including warning signs, suicidal ideation, plans, intent, previous suicidal behavior, and access to lethal means. It also examines approaches to determining the level of acute risk and selecting appropriate interventions, including referral, hospitalization, safety planning, lethal-means restriction, continuity of care, and evidence-based treatment strategies. Particular attention is given to the needs of military service members and veterans, as well as considerations for healthcare professionals themselves.

IMMINENT SUICIDE

While risk factors for suicide represent broader, durable, and ongoing factors, a suicide crisis is a time-limited event that signals an immediate danger of suicide. A suicide crisis can be triggered by a particularly distressing event, such as loss of a loved one or career failure, and involve an intense emotional state in addition to depression, such as desperation (anguish plus urgent need for relief), rage, psychic pain or inner tension, anxiety, guilt, hopelessness, or acute sense of abandonment. Changes in behavior or speech can suggest that suicide is imminent; speech may be indirect, with statements such as, "My family would be better off without me." Persons contemplating suicide may also talk as if they are saying goodbye or going away, exhibit actions ranging from buying a gun to suddenly putting one's affairs in order, or deterioration in social or occupational functioning, increasing use of alcohol, other self-destructive behavior, loss of control, or rage explosions [1].

WARNING SIGNS

Most people who are suicidal exhibit warning signs, whether or not they are in an acute suicide crisis. These warning signs should be taken seriously and include observable signs of serious depression, such as unrelenting low mood, pessimism, hopelessness, desperation, anxiety, psychic pain, and inner tension; withdrawal from friends and/or social activities; sleep problems; and loss of interest in personal appearance, hobbies, work, and/or school [1,2]. Other signs include:

  • Increased alcohol and/or other drug use

  • Recent impulsiveness and taking unnecessary risks

  • Talk about suicide, death, and/or no reason to live

  • Making a plan (e.g., giving away prized possessions, sudden or impulsive purchase of a firearm, or obtaining other means of killing oneself, such as poisons or medications)

  • Unexpected rage, anger, or other drastic behavior change

  • Recent humiliation, failure, or severe loss (especially a relationship)

  • Unwillingness to "connect" with potential helpers.

The following expressions of thoughts, feelings, or behaviors may also be warning signs of suicidal behavior [2]:

  • Can't stop the pain

  • Can't think clearly

  • Can't make decisions

  • Can't see any way out

  • Can't sleep, eat, or work

  • Can't get out of the depression

  • Can't make the sadness go away

  • Can't see the possibility of change

  • Can't see themselves as worthwhile

  • Can't get someone's attention

  • Can't seem to get control

A mnemonic device IS PATH WARM has been developed for use in identifying suicide risk [3,4]. This mnemonic device was derived from the consensus of internationally renowned clinical researchers held under the auspices of the American Association of Suicidology. It consists of the following [3,4]:

  • Ideation

  • Substance abuse

  • Purposelessness

  • Anxiety

  • Trapped

  • Hopelessness

  • Withdrawal

  • Anger

  • Recklessness

  • Mood change

SCREENING AND ASSESSMENT OF SUICIDE RISK

Many persons who die by suicide have contact with healthcare providers in the time preceding their deaths. Roughly 45% of all persons who die by suicide had contact with a mental health professional in the year before their deaths, and 75% of elderly persons who die by suicide had visited their physician in the month before their death [1,5]. Although close to 90% of these cases had diagnosable psychiatric illness at the time of death, only 30% reported suicidal ideation or intent to a health professional before their suicide attempt [1]. These figures suggest a widespread inadequacy in identifying and assessing at-risk persons by healthcare professionals, and numerous studies have concluded that health professionals often lack sufficient training in the proper assessment, treatment, management, or referral of suicidal patients [1,5]. Many health professionals also lack training in identifying grieving family members of loved ones who have died by suicide [5]. Primary care providers occupy a niche in the healthcare system and have perhaps the greatest opportunity to impact suicidal persons through educational means [5,6,7,8,9].

SCREENING IN THE PRIMARY CARE SETTING: EXPERT CONSENSUS

Many organizations have issued consensus statements regarding screening for suicide risk in the primary care setting. The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommends healthcare providers screen for depression in the adult population, including pregnant and postpartum persons and older adults [10]. The Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care recommends against screening all adults 18 years of age and older for depression using a questionnaire with a cut-off score. This recommendation does not apply to adults with a personal history, current diagnosis, or clinical suspicion of a diagnosis of depression or another mental health disorder. It also does not apply to anyone who may be at elevated risk of depression [11].

The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) recommends universal screening for suicide risk throughout adolescence (12 years of age and older) and clinically indicated screening for children 8 to 11 years of age [12]. Screening should be performed in a developmentally and medically appropriate manner. The AAP notes that screening for depression is not the same as screening for suicide risk and that screening for depression alone misses 36% of patients at-risk for dying by suicide [12]. Screening children younger than 8 years of age is not recommended, but warning signs or parental reports of self-harm or suicidal behaviors should be assessed further; these may include [12]:

  • Talking about wanting to die or wanting to kill oneself

  • Grabbing their throat in a "choking" motion, or placing their hand in the shape of a gun pointed toward their head

  • Acting with impulsive aggression

  • Giving away their treasured toys or possessions

The American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry recommends clinician awareness of patients at high risk for suicide (i.e., older male adolescents and all adolescents with current psychiatric illness or disordered mental state, particularly major depressive disorder), especially when complicated by comorbid substance abuse, irritability, agitation, psychosis, or previous suicide attempt [13]. Suicide risk should be assessed at each visit with patients with long-term SSRI use.

ASSESSMENT OF SUICIDE RISK

Initial Inquiry

Healthcare providers may encounter a patient they suspect is suicidal. This suspicion may be prompted by the presence of one or more of the risk factors for suicide described previously, patient history, a statement expressed by the patient, or by their intuition. This scenario may present a dilemma of how to proceed. Although some healthcare professionals are uncomfortable with suicidal patients, it is essential not to ignore or deny the suspicion of suicide risk. The first and most immediate step is to allocate adequate time to the patient, even though many others may be scheduled. Showing a willingness to help begins the process of establishing a positive rapport with the patient. Closed-ended and direct questions at the beginning of the interview are not very helpful; instead, use open-ended questions such as, "You look very upset; tell me more about it." Listening with empathy is in itself a major step in reducing the level of suicidal despair and overall distress [7,8]. It is helpful to lead into the topic gradually with a sequence of useful questions, such as [7,8]:

  • Do you feel unhappy and helpless?

  • Do you feel desperate?

  • Do you feel unable to face each day?

  • Do you feel life is a burden?

  • Do you feel life is not worth living?

  • Have you had thoughts of ending your own life?

It is important to ask these questions after rapport has been established, when the patient feels comfortable expressing his or her feelings, and when the patient is in the process of expressing negative feelings [7,8].

After the patient confirms an initial suspicion of suicidal ideation, the next step is to assess the frequency and severity of the ideation and the possibility of suicide. It is important to ask the patient about whether a method has been developed and planned, the accessibility to the means to attempt suicide, and the magnitude of lethal intent in a manner that is not demanding or coercive, but is asked in a warm and caring way that demonstrates empathy with the patient. Such general questions might include [7,8]:

  • Have you made any plans for ending your life?

  • How are you planning to do it?

  • Do you have in your possession [pills/guns/other means]?

  • Have you considered when to do it?

In general, the more an individual has thought about suicide, made specific plans, and intends to act on those plans, the greater the suicide risk. Thus, as part of the assessment of suicide risk it is essential to inquire specifically about the patient's suicidal thoughts, plans, behaviors, and intent. Such questions may often flow naturally from discussion of the patient's current situation, but in other cases they should be explicitly asked [14].

Other questions may help further elucidate suicidal thoughts, plans, or behaviors, including [14]:

Patient's Feelings about Living

  • Have you ever felt that life was not worth living?

  • Did you ever wish you could go to sleep and just not wake up?

Thoughts of Death, Self-Harm, or Suicide

  • Is death something you've thought about recently?

  • Have things ever reached the point that you've thought of harming yourself?

Follow-Up Questions

  • When did you first notice such thoughts?

  • What led up to the thoughts (e.g., interpersonal and psychosocial precipitants, including real or imagined losses; specific symptoms such as mood changes, anhedonia, hopelessness, anxiety, agitation, psychosis)?

  • How often have those thoughts occurred (including frequency, obsessional quality, controllability)?

  • How close have you come to acting on those thoughts?

  • How likely do you think it is that you will act on them in the future?

  • Have you ever started to harm (or kill) yourself but stopped before doing something (e.g., holding knife or gun to your body but stopping before acting, going to edge of bridge but not jumping)?

  • What do you envision happening if you actually killed yourself (e.g., escape, reunion with significant other, rebirth, reactions of others)?

  • Have you made a specific plan to harm or kill yourself? If so, what does the plan include?

  • Do you have guns or other weapons available to you?

  • Have you made any particular preparations (e.g., purchasing specific items, writing a note or a will, making financial arrangements, taking steps to avoid discovery, rehearsing the plan)?

  • Have you spoken to anyone about your plans?

  • How does the future look to you?

  • What things would lead you to feel more (or less) hopeful about the future (e.g., treatment, reconciliation of relationship, resolution of stressors)?

  • What things would make it more (or less) likely that you would try to kill yourself?

  • What things in your life would lead you to want to escape from life or be dead?

  • What things in your life make you want to go on living?

  • If you began to have thoughts of harming or killing yourself again, what would you do?

For persons with previous suicidal or self-harm behavior, the following questions address the antecedents, methods, and aftermath [14]:

  • Can you describe what happened (e.g., circumstances, precipitants, view of future, use of alcohol or other substances, method, intent, seriousness of injury)?

  • What thoughts were you having beforehand that led up to the attempt?

  • What did you think would happen (e.g., going to sleep versus injury versus dying, getting a reaction out of a particular person)?

  • Were other people present at the time?

  • Did you seek help afterward yourself, or did someone get help for you?

  • Had you planned to be discovered, or were you found accidentally?

  • How did you feel afterward (e.g., relief versus regret at being alive)?

  • Did you receive treatment afterward (e.g., medical versus psychiatric, emergency department, inpatient versus outpatient)?

  • Has your view of things changed, or is anything different for you since the attempt?

  • Are there other times in the past when you've tried to harm (or kill) yourself?

Repeated Suicidal Thoughts or Attempts

  • About how often have you tried to harm (or kill) yourself?

  • When was the most recent time?

  • Can you describe your thoughts at the time that you were thinking most seriously about suicide?

  • When was your most serious attempt at harming or killing yourself?

  • What led up to it, and what happened afterward?

Persons with Psychosis, Hallucinations, and Delusions

  • Can you describe the voices (e.g., single versus multiple, male versus female, internal versus external, recognizable versus unrecognizable)?

  • What do the voices say (e.g., positive remarks, negative remarks, threats)? If the remarks are commands, determine if they are for harmless versus harmful acts; ask for examples.

  • How do you cope with (or respond to) the voices?

  • Have you ever done what the voices ask you to do? What led you to obey the voices? If you tried to resist them, what made it difficult?

  • Have there been times when the voices told you to hurt or kill yourself? How often? What happened?

  • Are you worried about having a serious illness or that your body is rotting?

  • Are you concerned about your financial situation even when others tell you there is nothing to worry about?

  • Are there things that you have been feeling guilty about or blaming yourself for?

Potential to Harm Others

  • Are there others who you think may be responsible for what you are experiencing (e.g., persecutory ideas, passivity experiences)? Are you having any thoughts of harming them?

  • Are there other people you would want to die with you?

  • Are there others who you think would be unable to go on without you?

When assessing for suicide, it is important to be cautious of misleading information or false improvement [7,8]. When an agitated patient suddenly appears calm, he or she may have made the decision to attempt suicide and feels calm after making the decision. Denial is another important consideration. Patients may deny harboring very serious intentions of killing themselves.

All patients at acute risk for suicide who are under the influence (intoxicated by drugs or alcohol) should be evaluated in an urgent care setting and be kept under observation until they are sober. If the patient is intoxicated when the initial assessment is completed, it should be repeated after he or she is sober [15].

Lethal Means

All persons at risk for suicide should be assessed for availability or intent to acquire lethal means, including firearms and ammunition, drugs, poisons, and other means in the patient's home [15].

Clinicians should always inquire about access to firearms and ammunition and how they are stored. For military members and veterans, this includes assessing privately owned firearms. In addition, medication reconciliation should be performed for all patients. For any current and/or proposed medications, consider the risk/benefit of any medications that could be used as a lethal agent to facilitate suicide. Consider prescribing limited supplies for those at elevated risk for suicide or with histories of overdose or the availability of a caregiver to oversee the administration of the medications. In addition to medications, the availability of chemical poisons, especially agricultural and household chemicals, should be assessed, as many of these are highly toxic [15].

DETERMINING LEVEL OF RISK AND APPROPRIATE ACTIONS

The formulation of the level of risk for suicide guides the most appropriate care environment in which to address the risk and provide safety and care needs. The first priority is safety. Patients assessed as having a clear intention of taking their lives will require higher levels of safety protection than those with less inclination toward dying. Patients who are at high risk for suicide may require inpatient care to provide for increased level of supervision and higher intensity of care. Those at intermediate and low acute risk may be referred to an outpatient care setting and, with appropriate supports and safety plans, may be able to be followed-up in the community (Table 1) [15].

DETERMINE LEVEL OF RISK FOR SUICIDE AND APPROPRIATE ACTION

Risk of Suicide AttemptIndicators of Suicide RiskContributing FactorsaInitial Action Based on Level of Risk
High acute risk
Persistent suicidal ideation or thoughts
Strong intention to act or plan and access to lethal means
Not able to control impulse
Recent suicide attempt or preparatory behaviorb
Acute state of mental disorder or acute psychiatric symptoms
Acute precipitating event(s)
Inadequate protective factors
Maintain direct observational control of the patient
Limit access to lethal means
Immediate transfer with escort to urgent/emergency care setting for hospitalization
Intermediate acute risk
Current suicidal ideation or thoughts
No intention to act
Able to control the impulse
No recent attempt or preparatory behavior or rehearsal of act
Existence of warning signs or risk factorsb and limited protective factors
Refer to behavioral health provider for complete evaluation and interventions
Contact behavioral health provider to determine acuity of referral
Limit access to lethal means
Low acute risk
Recent suicidal ideation or thoughts
No intention to act or plan
Able to control the impulse
No planning or rehearsing a suicide act
No previous attempt
Existence of protective factors and limited risk factors
Consider consultation with behavioral health to determine need for referral and treatment
Treat presenting problems
Address safety issues
Document care and rationale for action
aModifiers that increase the level of risk for suicide of any defined level include acute state of substance use, access to means (e.g., firearms, medications), and existence of multiple risk factors or warning signs or lack of protective factors.
bEvidence of suicidal behavior warning signs in the context of denial of ideation should call for concern (e.g., contemplation of plan with denial of thoughts or ideation).

MANAGEMENT OF SUICIDAL PATIENTS

The opportunity for an emotionally disturbed patient with vague suicidal ideation to vent his or her thoughts and feelings to an understanding health or mental health provider may bring a degree of relief such that no further intervention is needed. However, in all cases the encouragement of further contact and follow-up should be conveyed to the patient, especially when inadequate social support is present. Independent of the actual catalyst, most suicidal persons possess feelings of helplessness, hopelessness, and despair and a triad of three cognitive/emotional conditions [7,8]:

  • Ambivalence: Most suicidal patients are ambivalent, with alternating wishes to die and to live. The healthcare provider can use patient ambivalence to increase the wish to live, thus reducing suicide risk.

  • Impulsivity: Suicide is usually an impulsive act, and impulse, by its nature, is transient. A suicide crisis can be defused if support is provided at the moment of impulse.

  • Rigidity: Suicidal people experience constricted thinking, mood, and action and dichotomized black-and-white reasoning to their problems. The provider can help the patient understand alternative options to death through gentle reasoning.

Healthcare professionals should assess the strength and availability of emotional support to the patient, help the patient identify a relative, friend, acquaintance, or other person who can provide emotional support, and solicit the person's help [7,8]. The engagement of supportive third parties in the patient's life can be a useful tool in preventing suicide completion.

Adherence to established best practices generally assures that assessment and care will be ethical and legal. It is important to consider and document informed consent. Underlying key ethical principles include respect for persons, autonomy, and beneficence [16].

PHARMACOTHERAPY TO REDUCE SUICIDE RISK

Abundant evidence has demonstrated that lithium reduces the rate of suicidal behavior in patients with bipolar disorder and recurrent major depression and that clozapine reduces suicidal behavior in schizophrenia [17,18,19,20,21,22]. Both drugs reduce suicide risk independently of their effect on the primary psychiatric disorder. Although the exact anti-suicide mechanism of both drugs has yet to be identified, lithium enhances serotonergic activity and clozapine is a potent 5-HT2A antagonist. Serotonergic modulation is a likely explanation of the suicide-reducing effects of both medications, because aggression levels and suicide are correlated with prefrontal cortical 5-HT2A binding [23,24,25]. The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs guideline states that there is insufficient evidence to recommend for or against lithium to reduce the risk of suicide attempts for patients with mood disorders [15]. Instead, the Department recommends ketamine infusion (for patients with suicidal ideation and major depressive disorder) or clozapine to reduce the risk of suicide attempts [15].

PSYCHOTHERAPY TO REDUCE SUICIDE RISK

In addition to pharmacotherapy, various psychotherapy approaches have been shown to decrease suicide risk in patients at low or intermediate risk for suicide [26]. Post-admission cognitive therapy is a cognitive-behavioral therapy approach designed to help patients who have suicide-related thoughts and/or behaviors. It consists of three phases of therapy for outpatients or inpatients [26]:

  • The patient is asked to tell a story associated with her or his most recent episode of suicidal thoughts, behavior, or both.

  • The patient is assisted with modifying underdeveloped or overdeveloped skills that are most closely associated with the risk of triggering a suicidal crisis.

  • The patient is guided through a relapse-prevention task.

Another cognitive-behavioral approach is cognitive-behavioral psychotherapy for suicide prevention, which involves "acute and continuation phases, each lasting about 12 sessions, and includes a chain analysis of the suicidal event, safety plan development, skill building, psychoeducation, family intervention, and relapse prevention" [27].

Dialectical behavior therapy was originally designed to address the self-harm impulses of patients with borderline personality disorder, but it has good evidence for use in most suicidal individuals. Dialectical behavioral therapy is an adaptation of cognitive-behavioral therapy and is based on the theoretical principle that maladaptive behaviors, including self-injury, are attempts to manage intense overwhelming affect of biosocial origin. It consists of the two key elements of a behavioral, problem-solving approach blended with acceptance-based strategies and an emphasis on dialectical processes. Dialectical behavioral therapy emphasizes balancing behavioral change, problem-solving, and emotional regulation with validation, mindfulness, and acceptance of patients. Therapeutic targets are ranked in hierarchical order, with life-threatening behaviors addressed first, followed by therapy-interfering behaviors, and then behaviors that interfere with quality of life.

MENTAL HEALTH REFERRAL

Depending on the level of suicide risk, referral to a mental health professional (e.g., psychologist, counselor, therapist), psychiatrist, or hospitalization may be warranted. Long-term treatment and follow-up will be required for many patients, and appropriate referral to outpatient facilities is often necessary. If the person is currently in therapy, the therapist should be called and involved in the management decision. If the patient does not have a therapeutic relationship with a mental health professional, referral to one should be made. Suicidal patients should be referred to a psychiatrist when any of the following are present: psychiatric illness; previous suicide attempt; family history of suicide, alcoholism, and/or psychiatric disorder; physical illness; or absence of social support [7,8]. After deciding to refer a patient to a mental health professional, the clinician should explain to the patient the reason for the referral and help alleviate patient anxiety over stigma and psychotropic medications. It is also important to help the patient understand that pharmacologic and psychological therapies are both effective and to emphasize to the patient that referral does not mean "abandonment." The referring clinician should also arrange an appointment with the mental health professional, allocate time for the patient following the initial appointment with the therapist or psychiatrist, and ensure the ongoing relationship with the patient [7,8].

REFERRAL TO BE HOSPITALIZED

Some indications for immediate hospitalization include recurrent suicidal thoughts, high levels of intent of dying in the immediate future (the next few hours or days), the presence of agitation or panic, or the existence of a plan to use a violent and immediate suicide method [7,8]. When hospitalizing a patient, she or he should not be left alone; the hospitalization and transfer of the patient by ambulance or police should be arranged and the family, and any appropriate authorities should be informed [7,8].

A patient may be discharged to a less restrictive level of care from an acute setting (emergency department/hospital/acute specialty care) after a behavioral health clinician evaluated the patient, or a behavioral health clinician was consulted, and all three of the following conditions have been met [15]:

  • Clinician assessment indicates that the patient has no current suicidal intent.

  • The patient's active psychiatric symptoms are assessed to be stable enough to allow for reduction of level of care.

  • The patient has the capacity and willingness to follow the personalized safety plan (including having available support system resources).

The period following acute care intervention and subsequent discharge is a time in which patients are at elevated risk for suicide. Consistent postdischarge engagement offers a safety net of support and ensures that any new crisis is swiftly identified and addressed [15].

ADDITIONAL OPTIONS FOR CONTINUITY OF CARE

It is important to ensure that the patient has follow-up contact even after discharge to another provider. At the point of discharge, information should be provided on crisis options (referred to as "crisis cards") and free, universally available help, such as hotlines. There is evidence that follow-up outreach in the form of letters or postcards expressing care and concern and continuing for up to three years may be helpful in suicide prevention [28]. These letters should generally be non-demanding, allowing the opportunity but not the requirement for patients to respond.

Alternatively, patients may be followed-up with phone calls from a mental health professional or suicide crisis volunteer [28]. If phone follow-up is preferred, calls should be made weekly or biweekly, in some cases supplemented with a home visit, and should continue for a period of three to six months.

In many cases, partnering with a community crisis center can be helpful [29]. Crisis call centers are a crucial resource in linking patients to services and providing emotional support. According to the Suicide Prevention Lifeline, crisis center follow-up before a service appointment is associated with improved motivation, a reduction in barriers to accessing services, improved adherence to medication, reduced symptoms of depression, and higher attendance rates [30].

SAFETY PLANNING

The VA recommends establishing an individualized safety plan for all persons who are at high acute risk for suicide as part of discharge planning, regardless of inpatient or outpatient status [15]. The safety plan is designed to empower the patient, manage the suicidal crisis, and engage other resources. Safety should also be discussed with patients at intermediate and low risk, with appropriate patient education and a copy of a safety plan handout [15].

Stressful events, challenging life situations, mental/substance use disorders, and other factors can precipitate a crisis of suicidal thoughts and behaviors leading directly to self-injury. Advance anticipation of challenging situations and envisioning how one can identify and break a cycle of suicidal crises can reduce risk of self-injury and enhance a patient's sense of self-efficacy. Open dialogue between patients and clinicians to establish a therapeutic alliance and develop strategies and skills supporting the patient's ability to avoid acting on thoughts of suicide (including minimizing access to lethal means) is an essential component of suicide prevention in clinical settings. Putting this thinking-through process in writing for the anticipation of a suicidal crisis and how to manage it constitutes a patient's safety (action) plan [15].

Safety planning is a provider-patient collaborative process—not a "no harm" contract. The safety planning process results in a written plan that assists the patient with restricting access to means for completing suicide, problem-solving and coping strategies, enhancing social supports and identifying a network of emergency contacts including family members and friends, and ways to enhance motivation. These plans are tailored to the patient by assisting with identifying his or her specific warning signs and past effective coping strategies [15].

The safety plan should include the following elements, as appropriate:

  • Early identification of warning signs or stressors

  • Enhancing coping strategies (e.g., to distract and support)

  • Utilizing social support contacts (discuss with whom to share the plan)

  • Contact information about access to professional help

  • Minimizing access to lethal means (e.g., weapons and ammunition or large quantities of medication)

The safety plan should be reviewed and updated by the healthcare team working with the patient as needed and shared with family and other supportive third parties if the patient consents. Safety plans should be updated to remain relevant during changes in clinical state and transitions of care [15].

Providers should document the safety plan or reasons for not completing such a plan in the medical record. In addition, patients should receive a copy of the plan [15].

Limiting Access to Lethal Means

Restricting at-risk patients from access to lethal means is considered an essential part of suicide prevention and safety planning. Methods of ensuring persons with suicidal intent do not have access to lethal means include restriction of access to firearms and ammunition, safer prescribing and dispensing of medications to prevent intentional overdoses, and modifying the environment of care in clinical settings to prevent fatal hangings [15]. For military service members, concerns about firearms should include privately owned guns and ammunition. It is also important to educate caregivers, family members, and/or other supportive third parties regarding the potential dangers of lethal means and how to keep these items or substances from the patient.

Storing firearms away from suicidal individuals can reduce gun deaths [15]. It must be stressed that the firearms are still the property of the individual, and they are not "giving them away." Options for safe storage of firearms include removing ammunition from an individual's possession, asking a friend or relative to take possession of firearms, disassembling firearms and storing various parts in different locations, storing firearms at a storage unit or gun locker at a shooting range, storing firearms at a gun shop or pawn shop, asking law enforcement to take possession of firearms, or storing personal firearms at military unit arms rooms [15]. The least restrictive and most acceptable means of removing easy access to lethal means should be employed in order to assure an individual welcomes the intervention. It is important to avoid implying that an individual is incapable of firearm possession or that they are unfit in a legal sense.

CONSIDERATIONS FOR VETERANS

With military service members, the command element should also be involved in education, safety planning, treatment planning, and implementation of duty limitations. Additional areas to address are the patient's medical and other specific needs. These may be psychosocial, socioeconomic, or spiritual in nature [15].

The VA/DoD has made the following recommendations when creating a treatment plan for veterans and active service members [15]:

  • Providers should take reasonable steps to limit the disclosure of protected health information to the minimum necessary to accomplish the intended purpose.

  • Providers should involve command in the treatment plan of service members at high acute risk for suicide to assist in the recovery and the reintegration of the patient to the unit. For service members at other risk levels, the provider should evaluate the risk and benefit of involving command and follow service department policies, procedures, and local regulations.

  • When performing a medical profile, the provider should discuss with command the medical recommendation and the impact on the service member's limitations to duty and fitness for continued service.

  • Providers should discuss with service members the benefit of having command involved in their plan and assure them their rights to protected health information, with some exceptions, regarding to the risk for suicide.

  • As required by pertinent military regulations, communicate to the service member's chain of command regarding suicidal ideation along with any recommended restrictions to duty, health and welfare inspection, security clearance, deployment, and firearms access. Consider redeployment to home station any service member deployed to a hazardous or isolated area.

  • Service members at high acute risk for suicide who meet criteria for hospitalization and require continuous (24-hour) direct supervision should be hospitalized in almost all instances. If not, the rationale should specifically state why this was not the preferred action, with appropriate documentation.

  • During operational deployment conditions or other extreme situations during which hospitalization or evacuation is not possible, "unit watch" may be considered as appropriate in lieu of a high-level care setting (hospitalization), and service department policies, procedures, and local regulations should be followed.

  • Because of the high risk of suicide during the period of transition, providers should pay particular attention to ensure follow-up, referral, and continuity of care during the transition of service members at risk for suicide to a new duty station or after separation from a unit or from military service.

CONSIDERATIONS FOR HEALTHCARE PROFESSIONALS

Although confidentiality is crucial when caring for any patient, this is heightened for healthcare providers who would potentially be seeking assessment and treatment in their workplace. All healthcare providers should be offered the opportunity for anonymous screening for depression and suicide. The healer education assessment and referral (HEAR) screening program is a sustainable suicide prevention program that uses an anonymous method to provide screening for untreated depression or suicide [16,31]. The American Foundation for Suicide Prevention also provides services specifically for healthcare providers, accessible at https://afsp.org/suicide-prevention-for-healthcare-professionals.

CONCLUSION

Suicide is a significant and preventable public health concern, and healthcare professionals have an important role in recognizing individuals who may be at risk and responding appropriately. Effective suicide prevention begins with recognizing warning signs and risk factors, engaging patients in open and empathetic communication, and conducting a thorough assessment of suicidal thoughts, plans, behaviors, intent, and access to lethal means. The level of acute risk should guide the intensity and setting of intervention, from addressing presenting concerns and arranging appropriate follow-up to behavioral health referral or immediate emergency evaluation and hospitalization.

Safety planning, restriction of access to lethal means, involvement of appropriate supports, and continuity of care are important components of ongoing suicide prevention. Individualized safety plans can help patients recognize warning signs, use coping strategies, engage supportive individuals, access professional resources, and reduce access to potentially lethal means. Particular attention should also be given to transitions in care and the needs of populations, such as military service members and veterans. Through timely identification, compassionate assessment, appropriate intervention, and continued follow-up, healthcare professionals can help reduce suicide risk and connect patients with the resources and care they need.

Works Cited

1. American Foundation for Suicide Prevention. Suicide Statistics. Available at https://afsp.org/suicide-statistics. Last accessed September 16, 2026.

2. American Association of Suicidology. Facts and Statistics. Available at https://suicidology.org/facts-and-statistics. Last accessed September 16, 2026.

3. Association of Suicidology. Know the Signs: How to Association of Suicidology. Know the Warning Signs of Suicide If Someone Might be Suicidal. Available at https://suicidology.org/know-the-signs-how-to-tell-if-someone-might-be-suicidal. Last accessed September 16, 2026.

5. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of the Surgeon General, and National Action Alliance for Suicide Prevention. 2012 National Strategy for Suicide Prevention: Goals and Objectives for Action. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services; 2012.

6. National Action Alliance for Suicide Prevention. Transforming Health Systems Initiative Work Group. Recommended Standard Care for People with Suicide Risk: Making Health Care Suicide Safe. Washington, DC: Education Development Center, Inc.; 2018.

7. World Health Organization. Preventing Suicide: A Resource for General Physicians. Available at https://apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/67165. Last accessed September 16, 2026.

8. World Health Organization. Preventing Suicide: A Resource for Primary Health Care Workers. Geneva: World Health Organization Department of Mental Health; 2000.

9. Kleespies PM (ed). Emergencies in Mental Health Practice: Evaluation and Management. New York, NY: Guilford Press; 2000.

10. U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Screening for depression and suicide risk in adults: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. JAMA. 2023;329(23):2057-2067.

11. Lang E, Gray C, LeBlanc JC, Colquhoun H, Traversy G, for the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care. Recommendation on screening adults for depression using a screening tool. CMAJ. 2025;197(35):E1132-E1143.

12. American Academy of Pediatrics. Screening for Suicide Risk in Clinical Practice. Availible at https://www.aap.org/en/patient-care/blueprint-for-youth-suicide-prevention/strategies-for-clinical-settings-for-youth-suicide-prevention/screening-for-suicide-risk-in-clinical-practice. Last accessed September 16, 2026.

13. Walter HJ, Abright AR, Bukstein OG, et al. Clinical practice guideline for the assessment and treatment of children and adolescents with major and persistent depressive disorders. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2022;S0890-8567(22):01852-01854.

14. American Psychiatric Association. Practice Guideline for the Assessment and Treatment of Patients with Suicidal Behaviors. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association; 2010.

15. U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs. VA/DoD Clinical Practice Guideline for Assessment and Management of Patients at Risk for Suicide. Available at https://www.healthquality.va.gov/guidelines/MH/srb. Last accessed September 16, 2026.

16. Bernert RA, Roberts LW. Suicide risk: ethical considerations in the assessment and management of suicide risk. Focus. 2012;10(4):467-472.

17. Lewitzka U, Severus E, Bauer R, Ritter P, Müller-Oerlinghausen B, Bauer M. The suicide prevention effect of lithium: more than 20 years of evidence: a narrative review. Int J Bipolar Disord. 2015;3(1):32.

18. Tondo L, Baldessarini RJ. Long-term lithium treatment in the prevention of suicidal behavior in bipolar disorder patients. Epidemiol Psychiatr Soc. 2009;18(3):179-183.

19. Asenjo Lobos C, Komossa K, Rummel-Kluge C, et al. Clozapine versus other atypical antipsychotics for schizophrenia. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010;(11):CD006633.

20. Kasckow J, Felmet K, Zisook S. Managing suicide risk in patients with schizophrenia. CNS Drugs. 2011;25(2):129-143.

21. Riesselman A, Johnson E, Palmer E. Lithium and clozapine in suicidality: shedding some light to get out of the dark. Ment Health Clin. 2015;5(5):237-243.

22. Cipriani A, Hawton K, Stockton S, Geddes JR. Lithium in the prevention of suicide in mood disorders: updated systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ. 2013;346:f3646.

23. Mann JJ. Neurobiology of suicidal behavior. Nat Rev Neuroscienc. 2003;4(10):819-828.

24. Underwood MD, Kassir SA, Bakalian MJ, Galfalvy H, Mann JJ, Arango V. Neuron density and serotonin receptor binding in prefrontal cortex in suicide. Int J Neuropsychopharmacol. 2012;15(4):435-447.

25. Oquendo MA, Russob SA, Underwood MD, et al. Higher postmortem prefrontal 5-HT2A receptor binding correlates with lifetime aggression in suicide. Biol Psychiatry. 2006;59(3):235-243.

26. Ghahramanlou-Holloway M, Neely LL, Tucker J. A cognitive-behavioral strategy for preventing suicide. Curr Psychiatr. 2014;13(8):18-25, 28.

27. Stanley B, Brown G, Brent DA, et al. Cognitive-behavioral therapy for suicide prevention (CBT-SP): treatment model, feasibility, and acceptability. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2009;48(10):1005-1013.

28. Brown GK, Green KL. A review of evidence-based follow-up care for suicide prevention: where do we go from here? Am J Prev Med. 2014;47(3 Suppl 2):S209-S215.

29. Suicide Prevention Resource Center. Continuity of Care for Suicide Prevention: The Role of Emergency Departments. Available at https://sprc.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/ContinuityCare_Suicide_Prevention_ED.pdf. Last accessed September 16, 2026.

30. National Suicide Prevention Lifeline. Crisis Center Guidance: Follow-up with Callers and Those Discharged from Emergency Department and Inpatient Settings. Available at https://suicidepreventionlifeline.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/Lifeline-Follow-Up-Guidance1214.pdf. Last accessed September 16, 2026.

31. Davidson JE, Zisook S, Kirby B, DeMichele G, Norcross W. Suicide prevention: a healer education and referral program for nurses.J Nurs Adm. 2018;48(2):85-92.

Evidence-Based Practice Recommendations Citations

1. Assessment and Management of Risk for Suicide Working Group. VA/DoD Clinical Practice Guideline for Assessment and Management of Patients at Risk for Suicide. Washington, DC: Department of Veterans Affairs, Department of Defense; 2024. Available at https://www.healthquality.va.gov/guidelines/MH/srb. Last accessed September 29, 2026.


Copyright © 2026 NetCE, PO Box 997571, Sacramento, CA 95899-7571
Mention of commercial products does not indicate endorsement.