Cargando…
Nonsuicidal self-injury among adolescents in south-east Serbia
BACKGROUND: Nonsuicidal self-injury (NSSI) refers to the deliberate, self-inflicted destruction of body tissue without suicidal intent and for purposes not socially sanctioned. The aim of this study was to explore the variety of self-injury behaviors as well as the function of NSSI among adolescents...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Centre
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6926179/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31890837 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpam.2019.06.002 |
Sumario: | BACKGROUND: Nonsuicidal self-injury (NSSI) refers to the deliberate, self-inflicted destruction of body tissue without suicidal intent and for purposes not socially sanctioned. The aim of this study was to explore the variety of self-injury behaviors as well as the function of NSSI among adolescents in South-East Serbia. METHODS: The study included 50 adolescents of both sexes, aged 13–18 years, who had deliberately engaged in self-injury at least once. A general socio-demographic questionnaire and the Inventory of Statements About Self-Injury (ISAS) were used in the study. RESULTS: The average age of the respondents was 15 (1.17); the most common NSSI methods were cutting (60%), followed by biting and severe scratching (14%); the average age of onset was 14.12 (0.77); the majority confirmed experiencing pain during self-injury (42%); the respondents more commonly performed NSSI when they were alone (68,0%); in 90% of the cases, the time elapsed between sensing the urge to self-injury and acting on it was less than 1 h; the majority of the respondents stated that they did not want to stop self-injuring (56%). In terms of the NSSI function, the obtained scores were the highest for affect regulation 3.36 (1.47), self-punishment 1.90 (1.39) and marking distress 1.72 (1.26). In terms of gender, there was a statistically significant difference for the antidissociation (P = .043), interpersonal influence (P = .004) and revenge (P = .019). CONCLUSION: The results may have practical implications when it comes to taking preventive and therapeutic measures in the vulnerable adolescent population. |
---|