Evidence
How we made the decision
How we made the decision
We check our guidelines regularly to ensure they remain up to date. We based the decision on surveillance 12 years after the publication of Self-harm in over 8s: short-term management and prevention of recurrence (2004) NICE guideline CG16 and surveillance 4 years after the publication of Self-harm in over 8s: long term management (2011) NICE guideline CG133.
For details of the process and update decisions that are available, see ensuring that published guidelines are current and accurate in developing NICE guidelines: the manual.
Previous surveillance update decisions for NICE guidelines CG16 and CG133 are on our website.
New evidence
Self-harm in over 8s: short-term management and prevention of recurrence NICE guideline CG16
We found 11 new studies in a search for systematic reviews and randomised controlled trials published between 19 September 2011 and 26 April 2016. We also considered 3 additional studies identified by members of the guideline committee who originally worked on this guideline.
Evidence identified in previous surveillance 7 years after publication of the guideline was also considered. This included 36 studies identified by search.
From all sources, 50 studies were considered to be relevant to the guideline.
We also checked for relevant ongoing research, which will be evaluated again at the next surveillance review of the guideline.
See Appendix A1: summary of new evidence from surveillance and references for all new evidence considered.
Self-harm in over 8s: long term management NICE guideline CG133
We found 15 new studies in a search for systematic reviews and randomised controlled trials published between 25 October 2012 and 26 April 2016. We also considered 6 additional studies identified by members of the guideline committee who originally worked on this guideline.
Evidence identified in previous surveillance 2 years after publication of the guideline was also considered. This included 13 studies identified by search.
From all sources, 34 studies were considered to be relevant to the guideline.
We also checked for relevant ongoing research, which will be evaluated again at the next surveillance review of the guideline.
See Appendix A2: summary of new evidence from surveillance and references for all new evidence considered.
Views of topic experts
We considered the views of topic experts, including those who helped to develop the guideline and other correspondence we have received since the publication of the guideline.
Views of stakeholders
Stakeholders commented on the decision not to update NICE guidelines CG16 and CG133. See Appendix B for stakeholders' comments and our responses.
Four stakeholders commented on the proposal to not update NICE guideline CG16: 2 agreed with the decision and 2 disagreed with the decision. Consultees mentioned that the guideline does not separate self-harm in terms of its nature. However, it was noted that the guideline adopted a broad definition of self-harm to cover all its variants. Consultees also referred to a case study as part of the Implementation Plan of the Mental Health Taskforce which highlights that NHS England is testing and evaluating models of crisis resolution for children and young people during 2016/2017. Therefore, we will add this to our guideline issues log and consider the results of this evaluation when available.
Three stakeholders commented on the proposal to not update NICE guideline CG133: 1 stakeholder agreed with the decision and 2 disagreed with the decision. Consultees mentioned that the guideline makes an emphasis on self-harm as a diagnosis but not about the psychological causes. The consultees referred to recommendations 1.4.2 and 1.4.4 regarding the lack of reference to the psychological causes. However, there was no new evidence during this surveillance review relevant to recommendations 1.4.2 and 1.4.4.
Two stakeholders commented on the proposal to leave NICE guideline CG16 on the static list: 1 agreed with the decision and 1 disagreed with the decision. No new ongoing or published studies were identified by the consultees related to NICE guideline CG16. A consultee highlighted a case study relevant to NICE guideline CG16 which is part of an evaluation of models of crisis resolution for children and young people during 2016/2017 by NHS England within the Implementation Plan of the Mental Health Taskforce. However, NHS England is testing and evaluating models of crisis resolution for children and young people during 2016/2017. Therefore, we will add this to our guideline issues log and consider the results of this evaluation when available.
This surveillance review also proposed to remove four research recommendations from the NICE version of NICE guideline CG133 and the NICE research recommendations database. Four consultees answered the proposal. Consultees disagreed with the proposal of removing three research recommendations. It was decided to retain these research recommendations based on the feedback on their importance. Consultees agreed with the proposal of removing the fourth research recommendation.
See ensuring that published guidelines are current and accurate in developing NICE guidelines: the manual for more details on our consultation processes.
NICE Surveillance programme project team
Sarah Willett
Associate Director
Philip Alderson
Consultant Clinical Adviser
Emma McFarlane
Technical Adviser
Yolanda Martinez
Technical Analyst
The NICE project team would like to thank the topic experts who participated in the surveillance process.
ISBN: 978-1-4731-2094-5
This page was last updated: 30 September 2016