Context, Timing and Individualized Care: A Realist Evaluation of Safety Planning for Individuals Living with Suicide-Related Thoughts and Behaviours, Their Families and Friends and Service Providers

<b>Background/Objectives</b>: This research aimed to identify and investigate how context facilitates or hinders safety planning interventions (SPIs) intended to manage suicidal ideation (SI) and behaviour (SB) from the perspective of service users, friends, family members, service providers and other key informants. Additionally, this research aimed to identify underlying mechanisms influencing the effective and acceptable management of SI and SB across these groups. <b>Methods</b>: A realist evaluation framework (i.e., Context + Mechanism = Outcome; CMO) was used to inform the qualitative study design, which explores whether SPIs are perceived as effective (i.e., outcome) and examines the underlying mechanism(s) and specific contexts involved. A total of 28 service users, 11 family members or friends and 15 key informants, including service providers and other stakeholders, participated in semi-structured interviews. A total of 18 frontline service providers also participated in three focus groups. These interviews and focus groups were analyzed to develop a shared model capturing the mechanisms and contexts influencing effective SPI implementation. Data was collected between September 2019 and December 2021. <b>Results</b>: The model consists of three pillars: (1) understanding the importance of context, timing and relationships in safety planning, (2) identifying perceived barriers and facilitators to safety planning as described by service users, family members and service providers, (3) bridging the gap between evidence and experience in implementing safety planning interventions. <b>Conclusions</b>: While SPIs are evidence-based interventions, contextual factors and perceived barriers and facilitators can impact implementation and outcomes in mental health care settings. Understanding these factors can help to explain differences in outcomes within and across patient populations and care settings, and addressing perceived challenges can improve implementation and experiences for service users, family members and service providers.