Article Data

  • Views 719
  • Dowloads 128

Original Research

Open Access Special Issue

Comparison of South Korean men and women admitted to emergency departments after attempting suicide: a retrospective study

  • Seung Taeg Seong1
  • Jung Il Lee2
  • Eun Kim3,*,†
  • Duk Hee Lee3,*,†

1Department of Emergency Medicine, Ewha Mok-dong Medical Center, Ewha Womans University, 07985 Seoul, Republic of Korea

2Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Korea University Guro Hospital, 08308 Seoul, Republic of Korea

3Department of Emergency Medicine, College of medicine, Ewha Womans University, 03760 Seoul, Republic of Korea

DOI: 10.31083/j.jomh1803066 Vol.18,Issue 3,March 2022 pp.1-9

Submitted: 29 August 2021 Accepted: 19 October 2021

Published: 31 March 2022

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Do men and women differ when it comes to suicidal behavior?)

*Corresponding Author(s): Eun Kim E-mail: silver215@hotmail.com
*Corresponding Author(s): Duk Hee Lee E-mail: ewhain78@gmail.com

† These authors contributed equally.

Abstract

Background: Suicide is a major health concern, especially in South Korea. The probability of dying by suicide and the fatality rate differ between men and women. The present study compared the suicide characteristics of women and men and analyzed the choice of suicide methods. Methods: This study retrospectively analyzed patients who visited the emergency department after a suicide attempt in the period from 2016 to 2018, which had been obtained from the National Emergency Department Information System. Variables included suicide methods, Korean Triage and Acuity Scale level, vital signs, and disposition following emergency care. Results: A total of 88,495 (54.7% women vs. 45.3% men) cases were investigated. Significant gender differences were observed in clinical outcomes. In total, 10.3% of the men (n = 3811) and 4.0% of the women (n = 1852) died in the hospital. Women were proportionately more likely to use poisoning (62.3% vs. 51.0% in men) and piercing and cutting (24.9% vs. 22.9% in men) compared with men, whereas men were more likely to use hanging (9.5% vs. 4.6% in women) and being struck (7.9% vs. 1.1% in women). Conclusions: Women chose less lethal suicide methods, whereas men chose more violent methods. The fatalities among men were higher, even when the same method was used. In establishing a suicide prevention policy, it is important to consider gender differences.

Keywords

Suicide; Gender; Suicide methods; Emergency department

Cite and Share

Seung Taeg Seong,Jung Il Lee,Eun Kim,Duk Hee Lee. Comparison of South Korean men and women admitted to emergency departments after attempting suicide: a retrospective study. Journal of Men's Health. 2022. 18(3);1-9.

References

[1] World Health Organization. Suicide worldwide in 2019. 2021. Available at: https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/ 9789240026643 (Accessed: 7 August 2021).

[2] Bostwick JM, Pankratz VS. Affective disorders and suicide risk: a reexamination. The American Journal of Psychiatry. 2000; 157: 1925–1932.

[3] Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. Sui-cide rates (indicator). 2019. Available at: https://data.oecd.org/healthstat/suicide-rates.htm (Accessed 11 August 2021).

[4] Stack S. Suicide: a 15-year review of the sociological litera-ture. Part I: cultural and economic factors. Suicide and Life-Threatening Behavior. 2000; 30: 145–162.

[5] Mościcki EK. Gender differences in completed and attempted suicides. Annals of Epidemiology. 1994; 4: 152–158.

[6] Callanan VJ, Davis MS. Gender differences in suicide methods. Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology. 2012; 47: 857–869.

[7] Kposowa AJ, McElvain JP. Gender, place, and method of sui-cide. Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology. 2006; 41: 435–443.

[8] Foundation KLRH. Korea Suicide Status. 2020. Available at: https://spckorea-stat.or.kr/korea02.do (Accessed: 11 August 2021).

[9] Center NEM. Statistical yearbook of emergency medical ser-vice. National Emergency Medical Center: Seoul. 2019.

[10] Kaplan MS, Geling O. Firearm suicides and homicides in the United States: regional variations and patterns of gun owner-ship. Social Science Medicine. 1998; 46: 1227–1233.

[11] Denning DG, Conwell Y, King D, Cox C. Method choice, intent, and gender in completed suicide. Suicide and Life-Threatening Behavior. 2000; 30: 282–288.

[12] Romero MP, Wintemute GJ. The epidemiology of firearm sui-cide in the United States. Journal of Urban Health. 2002; 79: 39–48.

[13] Ajdacic-Gross V, Weiss MG, Ring M, Hepp U, Bopp M, Gutzwiller F, et al. Methods of suicide: international suicide patterns derived from the who mortality database. Bulletin of the World Health Organization. 2008; 86: 726–732.

[14] Canetto SS, Sakinofsky I. The gender paradox in suicide. Sui-cide and Life-Threatening Behavior. 1998; 28: 1–23.

[15] McIntosh JL, Santos JF. Changing patterns in methods of suicide by race and sex. Suicide and Life-Threatening Behavior. 1982; 12: 221–233.

[16] Lim YD, Lee DH, Lee BK, Cho YS, Choi G. Validity of the Ko-rean Triage and Acuity Scale for predicting 30-day mortality due to severe trauma: a retrospective single-center study. European Journal of Trauma and Emergency Surgery. 2020; 46: 895–901.

[17] Kwon H, Kim YJ, Jo YH, Lee JH, Lee JH, Kim J, et al. The Korean Triage and Acuity Scale: associations with admission, disposition, mortality and length of stay in the emergency de-partment. International Journal for Quality in Health Care. 2019; 31: 449–455.

[18] Schrijvers DL, Bollen J, Sabbe BGC. The gender paradox in sui-cidal behavior and its impact on the suicidal process. Journal of Affective Disorders. 2012; 138: 19–26.

[19] Mergl R, Koburger N, Heinrichs K, Székely A, Tóth MD, Coyne J, et al. What are Reasons for the Large Gender Differences in the Lethality of Suicidal Acts? An Epidemiological Analysis in Four European Countries. PLoS ONE. 2015; 10: e0129062.

[20] Goldman-Mellor S, Olfson M, Lidon-Moyano C, Schoenbaum

M. Association of Suicide and other Mortality with Emer-gency Department Presentation. JAMA Network Open. 2019; 2: e1917571.

[21] Park S, Song Y, Kim J, Ki M, Shin J, Kwon Y, et al. Age, Period, and Cohort Effects on Suicide Mortality in South Korea, 1992–2015. International Journal of Environmental Research and Pub-lic Health. 2018; 15: 1580.

[22] Waern M, Rubenowitz E, Wilhelmson K. Predictors of suicide in the old elderly. Gerontology. 2003; 49: 328–334.

[23] Helbich M, Blüml V, de Jong T, Plener PL, Kwan M, Kapusta ND. Urban-rural inequalities in suicide mortality: a compari-son of urbanicity indicators. International Journal of Health Ge-ographics. 2017; 16: 39.

[24] Mergl R, Havers I, Althaus D, Rihmer Z, Schmidtke A, Lehfeld H, et al. Seasonality of suicide attempts: association with gender. European Archives of Psychiatry and Clinical Neuro-science. 2010; 260: 393–400.

[25] Elnour AA, Harrison J. Lethality of suicide methods. Injury Pre-vention. 2008; 14: 39–45.

[26] Cibis A, Mergl R, Bramesfeld A, Althaus D, Niklewski G, Schmidtke A, et al. Preference of lethal methods is not the only cause for higher suicide rates in males. Journal of Affective Dis-orders. 2012; 136: 9–16.

[27] Koller G, Preuss UW, Bottlender M, Wenzel K, Soyka M. Im-pulsivity and aggression as predictors of suicide attempts in al-coholics. European Archives of Psychiatry and Clinical Neuro-science. 2002; 252: 155–160.

[28] Sher L, Oquendo MA, Richardson-Vejlgaard R, Makhija NM, Posner K, Mann JJ, et al. Effect of acute alcohol use on the lethality of suicide attempts in patients with mood disorders. Journal of Psychiatric Research. 2009; 43: 901–905.

[29] Ministry of Health and Welfare. The Survey of Mental Disorders in Korea. 2016. Available at: https://www.mohw.go.kr/react/gm/sgm0704vw.jsp?PAR_ MENU_ID=13&MENU_ID=1304080705&page=1&CONT _SEQ=357654&PAR_CONT_SEQ=355847 (Accessed: 11 August 2021).

[30] Snowdon J, Choi NG. Undercounting of suicides: Where suicide data lie hidden. Global Public Health. 2020; 15: 1894–1901.

Abstracted / indexed in

Science Citation Index Expanded (SciSearch) Created as SCI in 1964, Science Citation Index Expanded now indexes over 9,200 of the world’s most impactful journals across 178 scientific disciplines. More than 53 million records and 1.18 billion cited references date back from 1900 to present.

Journal Citation Reports/Science Edition Journal Citation Reports/Science Edition aims to evaluate a journal’s value from multiple perspectives including the journal impact factor, descriptive data about a journal’s open access content as well as contributing authors, and provide readers a transparent and publisher-neutral data & statistics information about the journal.

Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) DOAJ is a unique and extensive index of diverse open access journals from around the world, driven by a growing community, committed to ensuring quality content is freely available online for everyone.

SCImago The SCImago Journal & Country Rank is a publicly available portal that includes the journals and country scientific indicators developed from the information contained in the Scopus® database (Elsevier B.V.)

Publication Forum - JUFO (Federation of Finnish Learned Societies) Publication Forum is a classification of publication channels created by the Finnish scientific community to support the quality assessment of academic research.

Scopus: CiteScore 0.7 (2022) Scopus is Elsevier's abstract and citation database launched in 2004. Scopus covers nearly 36,377 titles (22,794 active titles and 13,583 Inactive titles) from approximately 11,678 publishers, of which 34,346 are peer-reviewed journals in top-level subject fields: life sciences, social sciences, physical sciences and health sciences.

Norwegian Register for Scientific Journals, Series and Publishers Search for publication channels (journals, series and publishers) in the Norwegian Register for Scientific Journals, Series and Publishers to see if they are considered as scientific. (https://kanalregister.hkdir.no/publiseringskanaler/Forside).

Submission Turnaround Time

Conferences

Top