Nonsuicidal self‐injury in men: a serious problem that has been overlooked for too long

边缘型人格障碍 冲动性 背景(考古学) 焦虑 毒物控制 自杀预防 精神科 自杀意念 心理学 伤害预防 人口 临床心理学 人格 萧条(经济学) 医学 医疗急救 社会心理学 宏观经济学 生物 环境卫生 经济 古生物学
作者
Nathan A. Kimbrel,Patrick S. Calhoun,Jean C. Beckham
出处
期刊:World Psychiatry [Wiley]
卷期号:16 (1): 108-109 被引量:27
标识
DOI:10.1002/wps.20358
摘要

Nonsuicidal self-injury (NSSI) refers to the act of deliberately destroying one's own body tissue without conscious intent to die and for reasons that are not socially sanctioned1-3. Common methods include cutting, scratching, and burning oneself. It is estimated that around 6% of adults in the general population have engaged in NSSI at least once during their lifetime2. While once thought to occur primarily within the context of borderline personality disorder, contemporary research demonstrates that NSSI is a transdiagnostic condition which is associated with significant functional impairment3. As a result, NSSI disorder has been included in DSM-5 as a condition for further study. By definition, the function of NSSI is different from that of suicidal behavior, where the goal is to end one's life. The most common reason that patients provide for engaging in NSSI is that they believe that it helps them to regulate their emotions. Other commonly alleged reasons include self-punishment, physiological stimulation, and communication with others1, 2. Although NSSI and suicidal behavior are clearly distinct, increasing evidence suggests that NSSI is a significant risk factor for suicidal behavior. NSSI is more strongly associated with history of suicide attempts than impulsivity, depression, anxiety, and borderline personality disorder. Actually, NSSI is a stronger prospective predictor of suicide attempts than history of suicide attempts4-6. Despite the significant implications that NSSI has for patients' health, well-being, and risk for suicide, this important clinical condition has been largely overlooked among men. This lack of attention is due in large part to the historical viewpoint that NSSI is far more common among females than males7. However, contemporary population-based studies of NSSI have consistently failed to find evidence for sex differences in rates of NSSI among adults2, 8. A recent meta-analysis including many clinical studies concluded that "women are slightly more likely than men to engage in NSSI", but the overall rate of NSSI identified among males (26.36%) was still remarkably high9. In that meta-analysis, the observed sex difference appears to have been largely driven by the inclusion of clinical samples. The discrepancy in sex differences observed between clinical and population-based studies of NSSI may be due to the fact that women are more likely to seek out psychiatric treatment than men9. Sample selection practices might also help to explain this discrepancy, as clinical settings that have a preponderance of male patients (e.g., veterans' hospitals) are likely to be under-utilized in NSSI research. In support of this view, we found that 57% of male veterans seeking treatment for post-traumatic stress disorder reported a history of NSSI10, suggesting that men who are actively seeking treatment for psychiatric issues may be just as likely as women to engage in NSSI. Sex differences in the expression of NSSI could also affect prevalence estimates. The above-mentioned meta-analysis explored sex differences in NSSI methods and found that females were more likely than males to engage in cutting, biting, scratching, and hair pulling9. Wall/object punching was not included among the twelve NSSI methods considered in the meta-analysis. However, Whitlock et al1 reported that wall/object punching is the single most common form of NSSI endorsed by college-aged men. Moreover, males who self-injure are significantly more likely to engage in wall/object punching than females who self-injure (44% vs. 19%, p<0.001). Such findings are critically important, because the vast majority of NSSI research has not examined wall/object punching as a possible NSSI method. Thus, it is entirely possible that the systematic exclusion of one of the most common NSSI methods for males to use has resulted in a significant underestimate of the true prevalence of NSSI among men. More importantly, the failure to include wall/object punching and other forms of NSSI in standard psychiatric risk assessment batteries has likely resulted in many individuals (particularly men) who engage in NSSI not being properly identified and treated, despite the fact that NSSI is one of the strongest predictors of suicide attempts identified to date. In sum, NSSI is common among men and associated with high levels of clinical distress, significant functional impairment, and increased risk for suicide attempts. It is possible that prior research has underestimated the true prevalence of NSSI in men due to biased selection and assessment methods. It is time for clinicians and researchers to recognize that NSSI is a serious problem that warrants careful investigation in both men and women. Nathan A. Kimbrel1-3, Patrick S. Calhoun1-4, Jean C. Beckham1-3 1Durham Veterans Affairs (VA) Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA; 2VA Mid-Atlantic Mental Illness Research, Education, and Clinical Center, Durham, NC, USA; 3Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA; 4VA Center for Health Services Research in Primary Care, Durham, NC, USA This work was supported by the Research and Development and Mental Health Services of the Durham VA Medical Center and the VA Mid-Atlantic Mental Illness Research, Education, and Clinical Center. N.A. Kimbrel was supported by a Career Development Award (no. IK2CX000525) from the Clinical Science Research and Development (CSR&D) Service of the VA Office of Research and Development. J.C. Beckham was supported by a Research Career Scientist Award (no. 11S-RCS-009) from CSR&D. The views expressed in this letter are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the position or policy of the VA or the US government.

科研通智能强力驱动
Strongly Powered by AbleSci AI
科研通是完全免费的文献互助平台,具备全网最快的应助速度,最高的求助完成率。 对每一个文献求助,科研通都将尽心尽力,给求助人一个满意的交代。
实时播报
1秒前
可爱的函函应助whelp采纳,获得10
1秒前
蒋鹏煊完成签到,获得积分10
2秒前
wencan完成签到,获得积分20
2秒前
2秒前
3秒前
WSGQT发布了新的文献求助10
3秒前
落沧完成签到,获得积分10
4秒前
4秒前
英姑应助若宫伊芙采纳,获得30
4秒前
4秒前
5秒前
5秒前
wqd完成签到,获得积分10
7秒前
NexusExplorer应助下次一定采纳,获得10
7秒前
7秒前
斯文败类应助寂寞的乐天采纳,获得10
7秒前
量子星尘发布了新的文献求助10
7秒前
8秒前
打倒恶人完成签到,获得积分10
8秒前
8秒前
热情的马铃薯完成签到,获得积分10
9秒前
9秒前
SCI印刷机发布了新的文献求助10
9秒前
9秒前
科研通AI2S应助卓念梦采纳,获得10
9秒前
9秒前
9秒前
pluto应助Yuson_L采纳,获得10
10秒前
金金发布了新的文献求助10
10秒前
嘛呱完成签到,获得积分10
10秒前
Lin发布了新的文献求助20
11秒前
11秒前
12秒前
Bu完成签到,获得积分10
12秒前
壮壮应助无情的剑心采纳,获得10
13秒前
杨德帅发布了新的文献求助10
13秒前
天真鹤完成签到,获得积分10
13秒前
归尘发布了新的文献求助10
13秒前
14秒前
高分求助中
(应助此贴封号)【重要!!请各用户(尤其是新用户)详细阅读】【科研通的精品贴汇总】 10000
Translanguaging in Action in English-Medium Classrooms: A Resource Book for Teachers 700
Exploring Nostalgia 500
Natural Product Extraction: Principles and Applications 500
Exosomes Pipeline Insight, 2025 500
Qualitative Data Analysis with NVivo By Jenine Beekhuyzen, Pat Bazeley · 2024 500
Advanced Memory Technology: Functional Materials and Devices 400
热门求助领域 (近24小时)
化学 材料科学 生物 医学 工程类 计算机科学 有机化学 物理 生物化学 纳米技术 复合材料 内科学 化学工程 人工智能 催化作用 遗传学 数学 基因 量子力学 物理化学
热门帖子
关注 科研通微信公众号,转发送积分 5667772
求助须知:如何正确求助?哪些是违规求助? 4887765
关于积分的说明 15121847
捐赠科研通 4826643
什么是DOI,文献DOI怎么找? 2584209
邀请新用户注册赠送积分活动 1538157
关于科研通互助平台的介绍 1496386