Dataset Information

Effectiveness of brief psychological interventions for suicidal presentations: a systematic review.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Every year, more than 800,000 people worldwide die by suicide. The aim of this study was to conduct a systematic review of the effectiveness of brief psychological interventions in addressing suicidal thoughts and behaviour in healthcare settings. METHODS:Following PRISMA guidelines, systematic searches were conducted in MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and PsycINFO databases. A predefined search strategy was used. Two independent reviewers screened titles and abstracts followed by full texts against predefined inclusion criteria. Backward and forward citation tracking of included papers was conducted. Quality appraisal was conducted using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool for Randomized Controlled Trials and the CASP tool for randomised controlled trials. The small number and heterogeneity of studies did not allow for meta-analysis to be conducted. A narrative synthesis was conducted. RESULTS:Four controlled studies of brief psychological interventions were included, conducted in Switzerland, the U.S. and across low and middle-income countries. Three studies were conducted with adults and one with adolescents. All studies were judged to be at low risk of bias. All of the interventions were implemented with patients after attending emergency departments and involved 3412 participants. The main outcomes were suicide, suicide attempts, suicidal ideation, depression and hospitalization. The components of the interventions were early therapeutic engagement, information provision, safety planning and follow-up contact for at least 12 months. The interventions drew to, different degrees, on psychological theory and techniques. Two trials that measured suicidal ideation found no impact. Two studies showed fewer suicide attempts, one showed fewer suicides and one found an effect on depression. CONCLUSIONS:Although the evidence base is small, brief psychological interventions appear to be effective in reducing suicide and suicide attempts. All studies to date have been conducted with people who had attended the ED but the interventions could potentially be adopted for inpatient and other outpatient settings. Early engagement and therapeutic intervention based on psychological theories of suicidal behaviour, sustained in follow-up contacts, may be particularly beneficial. TRIAL REGISTRATION:Systematic review registration: PROSPERO CRD42015025867.

SUBMITTER: McCabe R

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5934886 | biostudies-literature | 2018 May

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Effectiveness of brief psychological interventions for suicidal presentations: a systematic review.

McCabe Rose R Garside Ruth R Backhouse Amy A Xanthopoulou Penny P

BMC psychiatry 20180503 1

<h4>Background</h4>Every year, more than 800,000 people worldwide die by suicide. The aim of this study was to conduct a systematic review of the effectiveness of brief psychological interventions in addressing suicidal thoughts and behaviour in healthcare settings.<h4>Methods</h4>Following PRISMA guidelines, systematic searches were conducted in MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and PsycINFO databases. A predefined search strategy was used. Two independ ...[more]

PMID: 29724203

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background: Nocebo effects contribute to a large proportion of the non-specific side-effects attributed to medications and are mainly generated through negative expectations. Previous reviews show that interventions designed to change participants' expectations have a small effect on pain experience. They are also effective in reducing side-effects caused by exposure to sham medications. To date, there has been no review of the influence of such interventions on symptoms attributed to real medicinal treatments. Objective: To review studies using a randomized controlled design testing the effect of brief psychological interventions compared to usual practice on the side-effect experience to medicinal treatments in healthy volunteers and patients. Methods: We searched Web of Science, Scopus, Medline, PsycINFO, PsycARTICLES, and Cochrane CENTRAL using search terms for randomized controlled trials along with "nocebo," "placebo effect," "medication," "side-effects," and associated terms. Studies were eligible if they studied a human population, used an active medicine, delivered a brief psychological intervention intended to influence side-effect reporting compared to usual care or no intervention, and used a randomized controlled design. Because of the heterogeneity of the literature we used a narrative synthesis and assessed evidence quality using the GRADE approach. Results: Our database search and supplementary search of the reference sections of included studies retrieved 50,140 citations. After screening, full text review and manual reference searches, 27 studies were included. The quality of the studies and evidence was judged to be low. The strongest and most consistent effect came from omitting side-effect information, although surprisingly de-emphasizing side-effects did not affect side-effect reporting. Other techniques, including priming, distraction, and altering the perception of branding, produced mixed results. Conclusion: Brief psychological interventions can influence side-effect reporting to active medications. Research is currently investigating new ways to de-emphasize side-effects whilst still upholding informed consent, but larger confirmatory trials with suitable control groups are needed. The literature in this area would be improved by more detailed reporting of studies.

Project description:Background: Refugees, asylum seekers, and internally displaced people experience a high burden of mental health problems owing to their experiencing traumas and stressful events.Objective: To summarise the available evidence and analyse the efficacy of brief psychological interventions (< 3 months) on improving mental health outcomes, including depression, anxiety, and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD)-related symptoms in refugees.Method: We searched Medline, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and Global Index Medicus from inception to 19 December 2023. We included controlled studies using any cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) or CBT-based therapies delivered over a short time (< 3 months), which reported mental health outcomes pre-and post-intervention. We conducted meta-analyses using random effects to derive pooled summary statistics. The quality of the evidence was assessed with the Cochrane Risk of Bias (RoB2) and ROBINS-I tools. This study is registered on the Open Science Framework, DOI 10.17605/OSF.IO/9CXU4.Results: 34 eligible studies across 37 publications were retrieved for analysis, and 33 studies with 4479 participants were included in the meta-analysis. There was an overall improvement in immediate mental health outcomes for all three domains, with analysis of 13 studies on anxiety outcomes (SMD -1.12, 95% CI -1.72 to -0.52), 20 studies on depression (SMD -1.04, 95% CI -1.97 to -0.11), and 24 studies on PTSD (SMD -0.82, 95% CI -1.20 to -0.45). At 3 to 6-month follow-up, however, analysis of mental health outcomes shows no significant change from baseline, with a SMD of 0.24 (95% CI -0.94 to 1.42) across 4 studies, -0.73 (95% CI -2.14 to 0.68) across 9 studies, and 0.29 (95% CI -0.94 to 1.53) across 12 studies for anxiety, depression, and PTSD respectively.Conclusion: Low-quality evidence shows brief psychological interventions have a positive immediate effect on refugees and internally displaced people's mental well-being. However, these effects do not persist in the short-term follow up. Heterogeneity was high, even among subgroups, impacting our findings' generalisability.

Project description:BackgroundMass outbreaks such as pandemics are associated with mental health problems requiring effective psychological interventions. Although several forms of psychological interventions may be advocated or used, some may lack strong evidence of efficacy and some may not have been evaluated in mass infectious disease outbreaks. This paper reports a systematic review of published studies (PROSPERO CRD:42020182094. Registered: 24.04.2020) examining the types and effectiveness of psychological support interventions for the general population and healthcare workers exposed to mass infectious disease outbreaks.MethodsA systematic review was conducted. Randomised Controlled Trials (RCT) were identified through searches of electronic databases: Medline (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), PsycINFO (EBSCO) and the Cochrane Library Database from inception to 06.05.2021 using an agreed search strategy. Studies were included if they assessed the effectiveness of interventions providing psychological support to the general population and / or healthcare workers exposed to mass infectious disease outbreaks. Studies were excluded if they focused on man-made or natural disasters or if they included armed forces, police, fire-fighters or coastguards.ResultsTwenty-two RCTs were included after screening. Various psychological interventions have been used: therapist-guided therapy (n = 1); online counselling (n = 1); 'Emotional Freedom Techniques' (n = 1); mobile phone apps (n = 2); brief crisis intervention (n = 1); psychological-behavioural intervention (n = 1); Cognitive Behavioural Therapy (n = 3); progressive muscle relaxation (n = 2); emotional-based directed drawing (n = 1); psycho-educational debriefing (n = 1); guided imagery (n = 1); Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing (EMDR) (n = 1); expressive writing (n = 2); tailored intervention for patients with a chronic medical conditions (n = 1); community health workers (n = 1); self-guided psychological intervention (n = 1), and a digital behaviour change intervention (n = 1). Meta-analyses showed that psychological interventions had a statistically significant benefit in managing depression (Standardised Mean Difference [SMD]: -0.40; 95% Confidence Interval [CI]: - 0.76 to - 0.03), and anxiety (SMD: -0.72; 95% CI: - 1.03 to - 0.40). The effect on stress was equivocal (SMD: 0.16; 95% CI: - 0.19 to 0.51). The heterogeneity of studies, studies' high risk of bias, and the lack of available evidence means uncertainty remains.ConclusionsFurther RCTs and intervention studies involving representative study populations are needed to inform the development of targeted and tailored psychological interventions for those exposed to mass infectious disease outbreaks.

Project description:BackgroundSuicidal ideation is a highly prevalent condition. There are several barriers for individuals to seek treatment that may be addressed by providing internet-based self-help interventions (ISIs). Current evidence suggests that ISIs for mental disorders may only be effective in reducing suicidal ideation if they specifically target suicidal thoughts or behaviors.ObjectiveThe aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to investigate the effectiveness of ISIs that directly target suicidal thoughts or behaviors.MethodsWe will conduct a sensitive systematic literature search in PsycINFO, MEDLINE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and the Centre for Research Excellence of Suicide Prevention databases. Only randomized controlled trials evaluating the effectiveness of ISIs for suicide prevention will be included. Interventions must be delivered primarily in a Web-based setting; mobile-based interventions and interventions targeting gatekeepers will be excluded. Suicide ideation will be the primary outcome; secondary outcomes will be completed suicides, suicide attempts, depressiveness, anxiety, and hopelessness. Study quality will be assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. We will provide a narrative synthesis of included studies. If studies are sufficiently homogenous, we will conduct a meta-analysis of the effectiveness on suicide ideation and, if possible, we will evaluate publication bias using funnel plots. We will evaluate the cumulative evidence in accordance with the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework.ResultsThis review is in progress, with findings expected by August 2019.ConclusionsThis systematic review and meta-analysis focuses on the effectiveness of ISIs for suicidal thoughts and behaviors. It will provide guidance to clinical practice and encourage further research by synthesizing the best available evidence.Trial registrationInternational Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) CRD42019130253; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=130253.International registered report identifier (irrid)PRR1-10.2196/14174.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Perinatal loss is a traumatic and complex experience that contributes to negative maternal psychological states and adverse outcomes impacting fetal development, maternal-fetal/infant bonding, marital/partner relationships, and child cognitive, emotional, and behavioral development. These outcomes present preventable disease burden and financial liability to individuals, families, and the healthcare system. Psychological interventions have the potential to improve outcomes for women and their families after perinatal loss. A few studies have explored the effectiveness of individual psychotherapeutic interventions in reducing maternal psychological distress after perinatal loss; however, a systematic review to compare these interventions has not been conducted. The primary objective of this systematic review is to determine the effectiveness of psychotherapeutic intervention on psychological distress and perception, coping, and adjustment in women who have experienced perinatal loss. The secondary objective of this review is to examine the content and delivery methods of effective psychotherapeutic interventions. METHODS:We endeavor to search electronic databases (PsycINFO, MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Scopus, CINAHL, Social Work Abstracts, Family and Society Studies Worldwide, Family Studies Abstracts, Academic Search Premier), gray literature databases (Proquest Dissertation and Theses Global, Web of Science Conference Proceedings Citation Index, OAIster, Open-Grey, Canadian Electronic Library, Canadian Research Index), and relevant organizational websites and conduct forward and backward citation searches of included studies. Inclusion criteria will consider studies that (1) are randomized controlled trials (RCTs), quasi-experimental (e.g., before-after design), and observational (prospective cohort); (2) include women affected by perinatal loss accessing psychotherapeutic intervention or support; and (3) evaluate a mental health or related outcome. Two authors will independently screen all citations, full-text articles, and abstract data. The study methodological quality (or bias) will be appraised using an appropriate tool. The primary outcome(s) will be measurements on the severity of depressive, anxiety, grief, and post-traumatic stress symptoms. Secondary outcomes will include measurements on difficulties in perception, coping, social, or dyadic adjustment. Conducting a narrative synthesis will identify relationships within study findings, and if appropriate, a random effects meta-analysis will be performed. DISCUSSION:This systematic review will summarize the effectiveness of psychological interventions, including their content and delivery method, in reducing psychological distress and improving outcomes for women affected by perinatal loss. The evidence generated from this review can inform researchers and policymakers in expanding on related research and developing customized interventions or programs. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION:PROSPERO CRD42019126456.

Dataset Information

Effectiveness of brief psychological interventions for suicidal presentations: a systematic review.

Publications

Effectiveness of brief psychological interventions for suicidal presentations: a systematic review.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets