Real-world evaluation of the zero suicide model shows significant challenges in implementation, indicating sociodemographic disparities.
Objective The rising rates of suicide in the United States have motivated several interventions, including among health systems. A leading quality improvement approach for health systems is the Zero Suicide (ZS) model. Despite its well‐recognized nature, implementation of ZS initiatives across health systems remains underutilized and understudied. We evaluated a 5 year‐long real‐world implementation of the ZS initiative in a behavioral health inpatient setting to understand strategies and challenges. Methods Electronic medical record (EMR) data were used over a period of 5 years between January 2020, and June 2024, to study implementation of 3 clinician‐delivered domains of the zero‐suicide model, identify, engage, and transition. For each domain, we evaluated implementation rates and then stratified by demographic characteristics. We also estimated a logit model with individual‐level data to examine whether implementation rates varied by demographic characteristic. Results During the implementation period, 8810 individuals were hospitalized and included 5703 unique individuals. For each domain, attrition was noted. Racial and gender disparities were observed in all domains. While 100% of individuals were screened and stratified for risk level, approximately 80% of individuals identified as high risk received safety planning, and 53.3% accepted the proposed transition intervention. Refusal reasons ranged from having enough resources to feeling overwhelmed. Conclusion Our study provides useful insights for behavioral health settings planning to implement the ZS initiative and discusses strategies including EMR integration. Relevance to Clinical Practice For clinical systems incorporating ZS as a quality improvement implementation, this study provides suggestions about potential challenges, particularly related to sociodemographic disparities.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ramanathan et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: