Disorders - Suicide or self-harm behaviours
Aggarwal, S., Patton, G.
Adolescent self-harm is an emerging public health challenge. It is associated with later psychiatric and substance use disorders, unemployment and suicide. Family interventions have been effective in a range of adolescent mental health problems and for that reason were reviewed for their effectiveness in the management of adolescent self-harm. The search identified 10 randomised and 2 non-randomised controlled trial conducted in the high-income countries. For the most part the evidence is of low quality. The interventions were classified as brief single session, intermediate-level and intensive family interventions depending on the intensity and duration of treatment. Brief interventions did not reduce adolescent self-harm. Intermediate interventions such as the Resourceful Adolescent Parent Programme, Safe Alternatives for Teens and Youth Programme and attachment-based family treatment were effective in reducing suicidal behaviour (effect size 0.72), suicide attempts (P=0.01) and suicidal ideations (effect size 0.95), respectively in the short-term with an absence of long-term follow-up data. Intensive adolescent interventions such as dialectical behaviour therapy and mentalisation-based therapy reduced suicidal ideation (effect size 0.89) and self-harm (56% vs 83%, P=0.01), respectively. The persistence of effects beyond the intervention end point is not known in many interventions. Early involvement of the family, an evaluation of the risks at the end of an acute crisis episode and a stepped-care model taking into account level of suicide risk and resources available to an adolescent and her/his family are likely to promote better outcomes in adolescents who self-harm.
Evidence-Based Mental Health, 21(1) : 16-22
- Year: 2018
- Problem: Suicide or self-harm behaviours (excluding non-suicidal self-harm)
- Type: Systematic reviews
-
Stage: Disorder established (diagnosed disorder)
-
Treatment and intervention: Psychological Interventions (any)
, Family therapy, Other Psychological Interventions
Kim, S., Kim, H., Lee, H., Noh, D.
PURPOSE: This study aimed to examine the effects of a brief stress management intervention on depression, anxiety, suicidal ideation, and aggression among Korean male college students.
DESIGN AND METHODS: In a repeated measures design, participants were assessed before, immediately after, and 3 months after the intervention. Data of 40 experimental and 32 control participants were analyzed using linear mixed models.
FINDINGS: There were significant time-by-group interaction effects for depression and trait anxiety, but not for state anxiety, suicidal ideation, and aggression.
PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: The intervention has long-term effects for depression and trait anxiety. Future research should involve a randomized controlled trial on a larger scale.
Perspectives in Psychiatric Care, 54(1) : 88-94
- Year: 2018
- Problem: Anxiety Disorders (any), Depressive Disorders, Suicide or self-harm behaviours (excluding non-suicidal self-harm)
- Type: Controlled clinical trials
-
Stage: Universal prevention
-
Treatment and intervention: Psychological Interventions (any)
, Other Psychological Interventions
Batterham, P. J., Calear, A. L., Farrer, L., McCallum, S. M., Cheng, V. W. S.
Purpose: Online mental health programs can be effective in reducing symptoms of depression, anxiety disorders, substance use and suicidal ideation. However, most existing e-mental health programs focus on a single domain of mental health, neglecting comorbidity. Furthermore, few programs are tailored to the symptom patterns of the individual user. FitMindKit was designed to overcome the gaps of existing e-mental health programs, providing tailored, transdiagnostic therapeutic content to address a range of comorbid mental health symptoms. A trial was conducted to test the program's efficacy. Methods: Australian adults with elevated symptoms of depression, anxiety, suicidal ideation and/or substance use were recruited through social media, with n = 194 randomised into a fully-automated trial of a 10-day brief intervention. Participants were randomly allocated to receive FitMindKit tailored to their symptoms, an untailored generic version of FitMindKit, or an attention control. Results: Mixed model repeated measures ANOVA indicated that participants in both FitMindKit and the attention control had significant reductions in symptom composite scores. Effects were not significantly greater in the FitMindKit program relative to control, either at post-test or 3-month follow-up. No effects were detected for specific decreases in depression, generalized anxiety, social anxiety, panic, suicidal ideation or alcohol/substance use. There were no significant differences between the tailored and static versions in effectiveness or adherence. Participants in the tailored and static conditions were more satisfied than in the control condition, with some evidence favouring the tailored condition. High attrition reduced power to find effects. Conclusions: FitMindKit provides a model for addressing comorbid mental health symptoms in an online program, using automated tailoring to symptom patterns. Modifications to the program are recommended, along with the need for larger trials to test the effects of tailoring on mental health outcomes. Copyright © 2017 The Authors
Internet Interventions, 12 : 91-99
- Year: 2018
- Problem: Suicide or self-harm behaviours (excluding non-suicidal self-harm)
- Type: Randomised controlled trials
-
Stage: At risk (indicated or selected prevention)
-
Treatment and intervention: Complementary & Alternative Interventions (CAM)
, Service Delivery & Improvement, Psychological Interventions (any)
, Technology, interventions delivered using technology (e.g. online, SMS), Other service delivery and improvement interventions
Cottrell, D. J., Wright-Hughes, A., Collinson, M., Boston, P., Eisler, I., Fortune, S., Graham, E. H., Green, J., House, A. O., Kerfoot, M., Owens, D. W., Saloniki, E-C., Simic, M., Lambert, F., Rothwell, J., Tubeuf, S., Farrin, A. J.
Background: Self-harm in adolescents is common and repetition occurs in a high proportion of these cases. Scarce evidence exists for effectiveness of interventions to reduce self-harm. Methods: This pragmatic, multicentre, randomised, controlled trial of family therapy versus treatment as usual was done at 40 UK Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services (CAMHS) centres. We recruited young people aged 11-17 years who had self-harmed at least twice and presented to CAMHS after self-harm. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive manualised family therapy delivered by trained and supervised family therapists or treatment as usual by local CAMHS. Participants and therapists were aware of treatment allocation; researchers were masked. The primary outcome was hospital attendance for repetition of self-harm in the 18 months after group assignment. Primary and safety analyses were done in the intention-to-treat population. The trial is registered at the ISRCTN registry, number ISRCTN59793150. Findings: Between Nov 23, 2009, and Dec 31, 2013, 3554 young people were screened and 832 eligible young people consented to participation and were randomly assigned to receive family therapy (n = 415) or treatment as usual (n = 417). Primary outcome data were available for 795 (96%) participants. Numbers of hospital attendances for repeat self-harm events were not significantly different between the groups (118 [28%] in the family therapy group vs 103 [25%] in the treatment as usual group; hazard ratio 1.14 [95% CI 0.87-1.49] p = 0.33). Similar numbers of adverse events occurred in both groups (787 in the family therapy group vs 847 in the treatment as usual group). Interpretation: For adolescents referred to CAMHS after self-harm, having self-harmed at least once before, our family therapy intervention conferred no benefits over treatment as usual in reducing subsequent hospital attendance for self-harm. Clinicians are therefore still unable to recommend a clear, evidence-based intervention to reduce repeated self-harm in adolescents. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2018 APA, all rights reserved)
The Lancet Psychiatry, 5(3) : 203-216
- Year: 2018
- Problem: Suicide or self-harm behaviours (excluding non-suicidal self-harm)
- Type: Randomised controlled trials
-
Stage: Disorder established (diagnosed disorder)
-
Treatment and intervention: Psychological Interventions (any)
, Family therapy
Cottrell, D. J., Wright-Hughes, A., Collinson, M., Boston, P., Eisler, I., Fortune, S., Graham, E. H., Green, J., House, A. O., Kerfoot, M., Owens, D. W., Saloniki, E-C., Simic, M., Tubeuf, S., Farrin, A. J.
Background: Self-harm in adolescents is common and repetition rates high. There is limited evidence of the effectiveness of interventions to reduce self-harm. Objective(s): To assess the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of family therapy (FT) compared with treatment as usual (TAU). Design(s): A pragmatic, multicentre, individually randomised controlled trial of FT compared with TAU. Participants and therapists were aware of treatment allocation; researchers were blind to allocation. Setting(s): Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services (CAMHS) across three English regions. Participant(s): Young people aged 11-17 years who had self-harmed at least twice presenting to CAMHS following self-harm. Intervention(s): Eight hundred and thirty-two participants were randomised to manualised FT delivered by trained and supervised family therapists (n = 415) or to usual care offered by local CAMHS following self-harm (n = 417). Main Outcome Measure(s): Rates of repetition of self-harm leading to hospital attendance 18 months after randomisation. Result(s): Out of 832 young people, 212 (26.6%) experienced a primary outcome event: 118 out of 415 (28.4%) randomised to FT and 103 out of 417 (24.7%) randomised to TAU. There was no evidence of a statistically significant difference in repetition rates between groups (the hazard ratio for FT compared with TAU was 1.14, 95% confidence interval 0.87 to 1.49; p = 0.3349). FT was not found to be cost-effective when compared with TAU in the base case and most sensitivity analyses. FT was dominated (less effective and more expensive) in the complete case. However, when young people's and caregivers' quality-adjusted life-year gains were combined, FT incurred higher costs and resulted in better health outcomes than TAU within the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence cost-effectiveness range. Significant interactions with treatment, indicating moderation, were detected for the unemotional subscale on the young person-reported Inventory of Callous-Unemotional Traits (p = 0.0104) and the affective involvement subscale on the caregiver-reported McMaster Family Assessment Device (p = 0.0338). Caregivers and young people in the FT arm reported a range of significantly better outcomes on the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire. Self-reported suicidal ideation was significantly lower in the FT arm at 12 months but the same in both groups at 18 months. No significant unexpected adverse events or side effects were reported, with similar rates of expected adverse events across trial arms. Conclusion(s): For adolescents referred to CAMHS after self-harm, who have self-harmed at least once before, FT confers no benefits over TAU in reducing self-harm repetition rates. There is some evidence to support the effectiveness of FT in reducing self-harm when caregivers reported poor family functioning. When the young person themselves reported difficulty expressing emotion, FT did not seem as effective as TAU. There was no evidence that FT is cost-effective when only the health benefits to participants were considered but there was a suggestion that FT may be cost-effective if health benefits to caregivers are taken into account. FT had a significant, positive impact on general emotional and behavioural problems at 12 and 18 months. Copyright © Queen's Printer and Controller of HMSO 2018.
Health Technology Assessment, 22(12) :
- Year: 2018
- Problem: Suicide or self-harm behaviours (excluding non-suicidal self-harm)
- Type: Randomised controlled trials
-
Stage: Disorder established (diagnosed disorder)
-
Treatment and intervention: Psychological Interventions (any)
, Family therapy
Hogberg, G., Hallstrom, T.
Suicide attempts and suicidal ideation in adolescence are considered to be related to suicide and psychiatric adversity later in life. Secondary prevention by improving the treatment of suicidal youth is a distinct possibility. In this study, treatment with a systematised mood-regulation focused cognitive behavioural therapy (MR-CBT) (n = 15) was compared with treatment as usual (TAU) (n = 12) in a group of depressed adolescents in a clinical setting. MR-CBT focuses on mood regulation by means of counter conditioning with memory reconsolidation being the proposed mechanism of change. Subjects practice keeping emotionally positive memories to diminish the emotional impact of negative memories. Symptoms of depression were tested with a short version of the Mood and Feelings Questionnaire (SMFQ), and wellbeing with the World Health Organization 5 Wellbeing Index (WHO-5). Suicidal events were rated according to the clinical interview Columbia Suicide Severity Rating Scale (C-SSRS). Suicidal events at the end of treatment were significantly reduced in the MR-CBT group, but not in the TAU group. Depression and wellbeing improved significantly in both treatment groups. While far from conclusive, the results are encouraging enough to suggest that further studies should be undertaken to examine whether psychotherapy focusing on mood regulation for young individuals at risk might enhance secondary prevention of suicide. Copyright © 2018 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 15 (5) (no pagination)(921) :
- Year: 2018
- Problem: Depressive Disorders, Suicide or self-harm behaviours (excluding non-suicidal self-harm)
, Suicide or self-harm with comorbid mental disorder
- Type: Randomised controlled trials
-
Stage: At risk (indicated or selected prevention)
-
Treatment and intervention: Psychological Interventions (any)
, Cognitive & behavioural therapies (CBT)
McCauley, E., Berk, M. S., Asarnow, J. R., Adrian, M., Cohen, J., Korslund, K., Avina, C., Hughes, J., Harned, M., Gallop, R., Linehan, M. M.
Importance: Suicide is a leading cause of death among 10- to 24-year-old individuals in the United States; evidence on effective treatment for adolescents who engage in suicidal and self-harm behaviors is limited.
Objective: To evaluate the efficacy of dialectical behavior therapy (DBT) compared with individual and group supportive therapy (IGST) for reducing suicide attempts, nonsuicidal self-injury, and overall self-harm among high-risk youths.
Design, Setting, and Participants: This randomized clinical trial was conducted from January 1, 2012, through August 31, 2014, at 4 academic medical centers. A total of 173 participants (pool of 195; 22 withdrew or were excluded) 12 to 18 years of age with a prior lifetime suicide attempt (>=3 prior self-harm episodes, suicidal ideation, or emotional dysregulation) were studied. Adaptive randomization balanced participants across conditions within sites based on age, number of prior suicide attempts, and psychotropic medication use. Participants were followed up for 1 year.
Interventions: Study participants were randomly assigned to DBT or IGST. Treatment duration was 6 months. Both groups had weekly individual and group psychotherapy, therapist consultation meetings, and parent contact as needed.
Main Outcomes and Measures: A priori planned outcomes were suicide attempts, nonsuicidal self-injury, and total self-harm assessed using the Suicide Attempt Self-Injury Interview.
Results: A total of 173 adolescents (163 [94.8%] female and 97 [56.4%] white; mean [SD] age, 14.89 [1.47] years) were studied. Significant advantages were found for DBT on all primary outcomes after treatment: suicide attempts (65 [90.3%] of 72 receiving DBT vs 51 [78.9%] of 65 receiving IGST with no suicide attempts; odds ratio [OR], 0.30; 95% CI, 0.10-0.91), nonsuicidal self-injury (41 [56.9%] of 72 receiving DBT vs 26 [40.0%] of 65 receiving IGST with no self-injury; OR, 0.32; 95% CI, 0.13-0.70), and self-harm (39 [54.2%] of 72 receiving DBT vs 24 [36.9%] of 65 receiving IGST with no self-harm; OR, 0.33; 95% CI, 0.14-0.78). Rates of self-harm decreased through 1-year follow-up. The advantage of DBT decreased, with no statistically significant between-group differences from 6 to 12 months (OR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.12-3.36; P = .61). Treatment completion rates were higher for DBT (75.6%) than for IGST (55.2%), but pattern-mixture models indicated that this difference did not informatively affect outcomes.
Conclusions and Relevance: The results of this trial support the efficacy of DBT for reducing self-harm and suicide attempts in highly suicidal self-harming adolescents. On the basis of the criteria of 2 independent trials supporting efficacy, results support DBT as the first well-established, empirically supported treatment for decreasing repeated suicide attempts and self-harm in youths.
Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01528020.
JAMA Psychiatry, 75(8) : 777-785
- Year: 2018
- Problem: Suicide or self-harm behaviours (excluding non-suicidal self-harm)
- Type: Randomised controlled trials
-
Stage: Disorder established (diagnosed disorder)
-
Treatment and intervention: Psychological Interventions (any)
, Dialectical behavioural therapy (DBT)
, Supportive therapy
Ougrin, D., Corrigall, R., Poole, J., Zundel, T., Sarhane, M., Slater, V., Stahl, D., Reavey, P., Byford, S., Heslin, M., Ivens, J., Crommelin, M., Abdulla, Z., Hayes, D., Middleton, K., Nnadi, B., Taylor, E.
Background: Intensive community treatment to reduce dependency on adolescent psychiatric inpatient care is recommended in guidelines but has not been assessed in a randomised controlled trial in the UK. We designed a supported discharge service (SDS) provided by an intensive community treatment team and compared outcomes with usual care. Methods: Eligible patients for this randomised controlled trial were younger than 18 years and had been admitted for psychiatric inpatient care in the South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust. Patients were assigned 1:1 to either the SDS or to usual care by use of a computer-generated pseudorandom code with random permuted blocks of varying sizes. The primary outcome was number of inpatient bed-days, change in Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) scores, and change in Children's Global Assessment Scale (CGAS) scores at 6 months, assessed by intention to treat. Cost-effectiveness was explored with acceptability curves based on CGAS scores and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) calculated from the three-level EuroQol measure of health-related quality of life (EQ-5D-3L), taking a health and social care perspective. This study is registered with the ISRCTN Registry, number ISRCTN82129964. Findings: Hospital use at 6 months was significantly lower in the SDS group than in the usual care group (unadjusted median 34 IQR 17-63 vs 50 days, 19-125, p=0.04). The ratio of mean total inpatient days for usual care to SDS was 1.67 (95% CI 1.02-2.81, p=0.04), which decreased to 1.65 (0.99-2.77, p=0.057) when adjusted for differences in hospital use before randomisation. Scores for SDQ and CGAS did not differ between groups. The cost-effectiveness acceptability curve based on QALYs showed that the probability of SDS being cost-effective compared with usual care was around 60% with a willingness-to-pay threshold of 20 000-30 000 per QALY, and that based on CGAS showed at least 58% probability of SDS being cost-effective compared with usual care irrespective of willingness to pay. We recorded no adverse events attributable to SDS or usual care. Interpretation: SDS provided by an intensive community treatment team reduced bed usage at 6 months' follow-up but had no effect on functional status and symptoms of mental health disorders compared with usual care. The possibility of preventing admissions, particularly through features such as reduced self-harm and improved reintegration into school, with intensive community treatment should be investigated in future studies. Funding: South London and Maudsley NHS Trust. Copyright © 2018 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 license
The Lancet Psychiatry, 5(6) : 477-485
- Year: 2018
- Problem: Suicide or self-harm behaviours (excluding non-suicidal self-harm)
- Type: Randomised controlled trials
-
Stage: At risk (indicated or selected prevention)
-
Treatment and intervention: Service Delivery & Improvement, Other service delivery and improvement interventions
Plener, P. L., Kaess, M., Schmahl, C., Pollak, S., Fegert, J. M., Brown, R. C.
Deutsches Arzteblatt International, 115(3) : 23-30
- Year: 2018
- Problem: Non-suicidal self-harm behaviours
, Suicide or self-harm behaviours (excluding non-suicidal self-harm)
- Type: Systematic reviews
-
Stage: Disorder established (diagnosed disorder)
-
Treatment and intervention: Psychological Interventions (any)
Robinson, J., Calear, A. L., Bailey, E.
Objectives: Youth suicide rates are unacceptably high. Schools have long been accepted as an appropriate setting for suicide prevention activities. This review aims to synthesise the evidence for all types of suicide prevention interventions across educational settings. Methods: The review draws on two previous reviews conducted by the authors. In order to be included, studies had to test a specific suicide prevention intervention in an educational setting, have a suicide-related outcome and target young people. Results: A totally of 21 studies were included: 17 were conducted in school settings and four in universities. Seven of the school-based studies (41%) and one of the university studies (25%) were randomised controlled trials. Overall, the trials conducted in schools reported positive effects, as did four of the non- randomised controlled trials. Two of the university-based studies reported positive effects. Both universal and indicated interventions showed positive results; no iatrogenic effects were reported. Conclusions: School-based studies can have a positive impact on suicide-related behaviour and, overall, do not appear to cause harm. Study quality is variable, and the number of studies conducted in school settings far exceed those conducted in universities. These gaps need to be addressed by future research. Copyright © 2018, © The Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrists 2018.
Australasian Psychiatry, 26(2) : 132-140
- Year: 2018
- Problem: Suicide or self-harm behaviours (excluding non-suicidal self-harm)
- Type: Systematic reviews
-
Stage: Universal prevention
, At risk (indicated or selected prevention)
-
Treatment and intervention: Psychological Interventions (any)
Weinstein, S. M., Cruz, R. A., Isaia, A. R., Peters, A. T., West, A. E.
Despite high rates of suicide ideation (SI) and behavior in youth with pediatric bipolar disorder (PBD), little work has examined how psychosocial interventions impact suicidality among this high-risk group. The current study examined SI outcomes in a randomized clinical trial comparing Child- and Family-Focused Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CFF-CBT) for PBD versus psychotherapy treatment-as-usual (TAU). Although not designed for suicide prevention, CFF-CBT addresses child and family factors related to suicide risk and thus was hypothesized to generalize to the treatment of suicidality.
Suicide & Life-Threatening Behavior, 48(6) : 797-811
- Year: 2018
- Problem: Suicide or self-harm behaviours (excluding non-suicidal self-harm)
, Suicide or self-harm with comorbid mental disorder
- Type: Randomised controlled trials
-
Stage: At risk (indicated or selected prevention)
-
Treatment and intervention: Psychological Interventions (any)
, Cognitive & behavioural therapies (CBT)
, Family therapy
Asarnow, J. R., Hughes, J. L., Babeva, K. N., Sugar, C. A.
Objective: Suicide is a leading cause of death. New data indicate alarming increases in suicide death rates, yet no treatments with replicated efficacy or effectiveness exist for youths with self-harm presentations, a high-risk group for both fatal and nonfatal suicide attempts. We addressed this gap by evaluating Safe Alternatives for Teens and Youths (SAFETY), a cognitive-behavioral, dialectical behavior therapy-informed family treatment designed to promote safety. Method: Randomized controlled trial for adolescents (12-18 years of age) with recent (past 3 months) suicide attempts or other self-harm. Youth were randomized either to SAFETY or to treatment as usual enhanced by parent education and support accessing community treatment (E-TAU). Outcomes were evaluated at baseline, 3 months, or end of treatment period, and were followed up through 6 to 12 months. The primary outcome was youth-reported incident suicide attempts through the 3-month follow-up. Results: Survival analyses indicated a significantly higher probability of survival without a suicide attempt by the 3-month follow-up point among SAFETY youths (cumulative estimated probability of survival without suicide attempt = 1.00, standard error = 0), compared to E-TAU youths (cumulative estimated probability of survival without suicide attempt = 0.67, standard error = 0.14; z = 2.45, p = .02, number needed to treat = 3) and for the overall survival curves (Wilcoxon chi21 = 5.81, p = .02). Sensitivity analyses using parent report when youth report was unavailable and conservative assumptions regarding missing data yielded similar results for 3-month outcomes. Conclusion: Results support the efficacy of SAFETY for preventing suicide attempts in adolescents presenting with recent self-harm. This is the second randomized trial to demonstrate that treatment including cognitive-behavioral and family components can provide some protection from suicide attempt risk in these high-risk youths. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2017 APA, all rights reserved)
Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 56(6) : 506-514
- Year: 2017
- Problem: Non-suicidal self-harm behaviours
, Suicide or self-harm behaviours (excluding non-suicidal self-harm)
- Type: Randomised controlled trials
-
Stage: Disorder established (diagnosed disorder)
-
Treatment and intervention: Psychological Interventions (any)
, Other Psychological Interventions