Evaluating Postvention Services and the Acceptability of Models of Postvention: A Systematic Review.

SUICIDE prevention; COMMUNITY health services; SUPPORT groups; HEALTH services accessibility; HOLISTIC medicine; MEDICAL information storage & retrieval systems; COMMUNITY support; ATTITUDES toward death; CONCEPTUAL models; CINAHL database; AFFINITY groups; BEREAVEMENT; SYSTEMATIC reviews; MEDLINE; PSYCHOLOGY; SUICIDE; MEDICAL databases; QUALITY of life; SOCIAL support; QUALITY assurance; PSYCHOLOGY information storage & retrieval systems

Background: Suicide is a major public health issue that increases the risk of suicide for those bereaved by suicide themselves. There is a lack of evaluation of the effectiveness and acceptability of suicide postvention services supporting those bereaved by suicide. Aims: This review aimed to assess evaluations of postvention services supporting those bereaved by suicide and the acceptability of methods of postvention. Methods: Searches of peer-reviewed literature identified 36 studies for inclusion. 22 studies evaluated specific postvention services, 14 evaluated models of postvention. Results: Using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool, mixed-methods and qualitative postvention evaluation and acceptability research produce high-quality studies. Studies rated as low quality reflect poor reporting, rather than ineffective services. Conclusion: Further evaluation of community-based postvention services within the UK is needed. This would evidence that services in the UK are effective in supporting those bereaved by suicide. Evaluation would benefit services in accessing funding, improve service development and provide holistic support. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Omega: Journal of Death & Dying is the property of Sage Publications Inc. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)