A Pilot Study of Clinicians' Perceptions of Feasibility, Client-Centeredness, and Usability of the Systematic Tailored Assessment for Responding to Suicidality Protocol
View/ Open
File version
Version of Record (VoR)
Author(s)
Hawgood, Jacinta
Ownsworth, Tamara
Mason, Helen
Spence, Susan H
Arensman, Ella
De Leo, Diego
Griffith University Author(s)
Year published
2021
Metadata
Show full item recordAbstract
Abstract. Background: The Systematic Tailored Assessment for Responding to Suicidality (STARS) is a client-centered, psychosocial needs-based assessment protocol. This semistructured interview obtains client prioritized indicators that contribute to suicidality and informs commensurate care responses for preventing suicide. Aim: To pilot the feasibility, client-centeredness, and usability of the STARS protocol, including clinicians' perceptions of ease of use; content validity; and administration within the community setting. Method: A convenience sample of clinicians who undertook assessment and/or intervention with suicidal ...
View more >Abstract. Background: The Systematic Tailored Assessment for Responding to Suicidality (STARS) is a client-centered, psychosocial needs-based assessment protocol. This semistructured interview obtains client prioritized indicators that contribute to suicidality and informs commensurate care responses for preventing suicide. Aim: To pilot the feasibility, client-centeredness, and usability of the STARS protocol, including clinicians' perceptions of ease of use; content validity; and administration within the community setting. Method: A convenience sample of clinicians who undertook assessment and/or intervention with suicidal persons and had used STARS between mid-2016 and early 2017 completed an online survey assessing feasibility, client-centeredness, and usability of STARS. Results: Of the 51 clinicians who entered the survey, 42 (82.3%; aged 25–74; 69% female) completed it. Overall, perceptions of feasibility and usability of STARS were positive, particularly regarding client-centeredness of the protocol and confidence in information obtained for screening suicidality and informing needs-based priority responses. Limitations: The pilot findings are limited by the use of a small convenience sample and the low completion rate of clinicians with STARS training. Conclusion: STARS was perceived as a feasible and useful psychosocial needs-based assessment protocol. Suggestions for improving STARS, training requirements, and application to diverse populations are outlined.
View less >
View more >Abstract. Background: The Systematic Tailored Assessment for Responding to Suicidality (STARS) is a client-centered, psychosocial needs-based assessment protocol. This semistructured interview obtains client prioritized indicators that contribute to suicidality and informs commensurate care responses for preventing suicide. Aim: To pilot the feasibility, client-centeredness, and usability of the STARS protocol, including clinicians' perceptions of ease of use; content validity; and administration within the community setting. Method: A convenience sample of clinicians who undertook assessment and/or intervention with suicidal persons and had used STARS between mid-2016 and early 2017 completed an online survey assessing feasibility, client-centeredness, and usability of STARS. Results: Of the 51 clinicians who entered the survey, 42 (82.3%; aged 25–74; 69% female) completed it. Overall, perceptions of feasibility and usability of STARS were positive, particularly regarding client-centeredness of the protocol and confidence in information obtained for screening suicidality and informing needs-based priority responses. Limitations: The pilot findings are limited by the use of a small convenience sample and the low completion rate of clinicians with STARS training. Conclusion: STARS was perceived as a feasible and useful psychosocial needs-based assessment protocol. Suggestions for improving STARS, training requirements, and application to diverse populations are outlined.
View less >
Journal Title
Crisis
Copyright Statement
© 2021 The Author(s) Distributed as a Hogrefe OpenMind article under the license CC BY 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Note
This publication has been entered as an advanced online version in Griffith Research Online.
Subject
Health services and systems
Public health
Psychology
Social work
Clinical and health psychology