Longer-term effectiveness of systemic family therapy compared with treatment as usual for young people after self-harm: An extended follow up of pragmatic randomised controlled trial

Interventions for youth suicide and suicide-related behaviour: An update to a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

To update our 2018 review with the latest evidence from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) on the effectiveness of interventions to prevent youth suicide and suicide-related behaviour.

METHOD

In keeping with our 2018 review, Embase, PsycInfo, and Medline were searched using relevant key words. Included trials were RCTs evaluating the impact of an intervention or approach designed to prevent or reduce youth suicide and suicide-related behaviour. Key data were extracted, and results synthesised narratively.

RESULTS

Thirty RCTs were included across clinical (n = 13), educational (n = 8), and community settings (n = 9). No trials were conducted in workplace or primary care settings, or with indigenous populations, and few trials involved partnerships with young people. There were some concerns or a high risk of bias for most trials.

CONCLUSION

While a relatively large number of RCTs have been published in recent years, knowledge gaps remain. Further high-quality RCTs are needed, including those focussing on vulnerable population groups. Meaningful consumer involvement and a stronger emphasis on implementation are also recommended.

Screening for Depression and Suicide Risk in Children and Adolescents: Updated Evidence Report and Systematic Review for the US Preventive Services Task Force

Importance

Depression, suicidal ideation, and self-harm behaviors in youth are associated with functional impairment and suicide.

Objective

To review the evidence on screening for depression or suicide risk in children and adolescents to inform the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF).

Data Sources

PubMed, Cochrane Library, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and trial registries through July 19, 2021; references, experts, and surveillance through June 1, 2022.

Study Selection

English-language, randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of screening for depression or suicide risk; diagnostic test accuracy studies; RCTs of psychotherapy and first-line pharmacotherapy; RCTs, observational studies, and systematic reviews reporting harms.

Data Extraction and Synthesis

Two reviewers assessed titles/abstracts, full-text articles, and study quality and extracted data; when at least 3 similar studies were available, meta-analyses were conducted.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Test accuracy, symptoms, response, remission, loss of diagnosis, mortality, functioning, suicide-related events, and adverse events.

Results

Twenty-one studies (N = 5433) were included for depression and 19 studies (N = 6290) for suicide risk. For depression, no studies reported on the direct effects of screening on health outcomes, and 7 studies (n = 3281) reported sensitivity of screening instruments ranging from 0.59 to 0.94 and specificity from 0.38 to 0.96. Depression treatment with psychotherapy was associated with improved symptoms (Beck Depression Inventory pooled standardized mean difference, -0.58 [95% CI, -0.83 to -0.34]; n = 471; 4 studies; and Hamilton Depression Scale pooled mean difference, -2.25 [95% CI, -4.09 to -0.41]; n = 262; 3 studies) clinical response (3 studies with statistically significant results using varying thresholds), and loss of diagnosis (relative risk, 1.73 [95% CI, 1.00 to 3.00; n = 395; 4 studies). Pharmacotherapy was associated with improvement on symptoms (Children's Depression Rating Scale-Revised mean difference, -3.76 [95% CI, -5.95 to -1.57; n = 793; 3 studies), remission (relative risk, 1.20 [95% CI, 1.00 to 1.45]; n = 793; 3 studies) and functioning (Children's Global Assessment Scale pooled mean difference, 2.60 (95% CI, 0.78 to 4.42; n = 793; 3 studies). Other outcomes were not statistically significantly different. Differences in suicide-related outcomes and adverse events for pharmacotherapy when compared with placebo were not statistically significant. For suicide risk, no studies reported on the direct benefits of screening on health outcomes, and 2 RCTs (n = 2675) reported no harms of screening. One study (n = 581) reported on sensitivity of screening, ranging from 0.87 to 0.91; specificity was 0.60. Sixteen RCTs (n = 3034) reported on suicide risk interventions. Interventions were associated with lower scores for the Beck Hopelessness Scale (pooled mean difference, -2.35 [95% CI, -4.06 to -0.65]; n = 644; 4 RCTs). Findings for other suicide-related outcomes were mixed or not statistically significantly different.

Conclusion and Relevance

Indirect evidence suggested that some screening instruments were reasonably accurate for detecting depression. Psychotherapy and pharmacotherapy were associated with some benefits and no statistically significant harms for depression, but the evidence was limited for suicide risk screening instruments and interventions.

Study designs and outcomes used in evaluation studies of hospital-presenting self-harm: protocol for a methodological systematic review

INTRODUCTION

Self-harm is the most common risk factor for suicide, and so those who present to hospital following self-harm provide an opportunity for targeted clinical care interventions. Observational studies evaluating such interventions may be useful in overcoming limitations of controlled trials, but study design, statistical analyses and outcomes used must be appropriate. This methodological systematic review will describe, categorise, synthesise and compare the methodological aspects of studies evaluating interventions and aspects of clinical management following hospital-presenting self-harm in both observational and experimental (ie, controlled trials or quasi-experimental studies) study designs.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis-Protocol guidelines were followed in drafting this protocol. Search terms were developed (related to self-harm, hospital presentation and evaluation studies) and adapted for MEDLINE, PsycINFO, EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and grey literature databases. Two reviewers will independently screen 100 titles/abstracts until consensus is reached, with the remaining screened by one reviewer. Full-text screening will be conducted independently by two reviewers. Data will be extracted by one reviewer, and a second will check all data extracted. Validated risk of bias tools will be used. Data synthesis will focus on the heterogeneity of outcomes used in individual studies. Descriptive summary statistics of the data (eg, key study characteristics, type and frequency of outcomes) will be provided in categorical format, using frequencies and percentages. Outcomes will be reported separately for trials (both randomised and non-randomised trials), observational and quasi-experimental studies. Categorisation of outcomes will be guided by Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care resources for reviews of health systems interventions.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Results will be disseminated at national and international conferences and published in a peer-reviewed journal. Findings will be used to inform future studies in the area of hospital-presenting self-harm. Ethical approval is not required for this review.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42020208714.

Comparative Efficacy and Acceptability of Psychotherapies for Self-harm and Suicidal Behavior Among Children and Adolescents: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis

IMPORTANCE

Self-harm and suicidal behavior are associated with substantial morbidity and mortality among children and adolescents. The comparative performance of psychotherapies for suicidality is unclear because few head-to-head clinical trials have been conducted.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the efficacy of psychotherapies for the treatment of self-harm and suicidality among children and adolescents.

DATA SOURCES

Four major bibliographic databases (PubMed, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and Embase) were searched for clinical trials comparing psychotherapy with control conditions from inception to September 2020.

STUDY SELECTION

Randomized clinical trials comparing psychotherapies for suicidality and/or self-harm with control conditions among children and adolescents were included after a blinded review by 3 independent reviewers (A.B., M.P., and J.W.).

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) reporting guideline was followed for data abstraction, and the Cochrane risk of bias tool was used to evaluate study-level risk of bias. Data abstraction was performed by 1 reviewer (A.B.) and confirmed by 2 independent blinded reviewers (J.W. and M.P.). Data were analyzed from October 15, 2020, to February 15, 2021.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary outcomes were dichotomized self-harm and retention in treatment. The secondary outcomes were dichotomized all-cause treatment discontinuation and scores on instruments measuring suicidal ideation and depressive symptoms. Effect sizes were pooled using frequentist random-effects network meta-analysis models to generate summary odds ratios (ORs) and Cohen d standardized mean differences (SMDs). Negative Cohen d SMDs or ORs less than 1 indicated that the treatment reduced the parameter of interest relative to the control condition (eg, signifying a beneficial association with suicidal ideation).

RESULTS

The systematic search generated 1272 unique records. Of those, 44 randomized clinical trials (5406 total participants; 4109 female participants [76.0%]) from 49 articles were selected (5 follow-up studies were merged with their primary clinical trials to avoid publication bias). The selected clinical trials spanned January 1, 1995, to December 31, 2020. The median duration of treatment was 3 months (range, 0.25-12.00 months), and the median follow-up period was 12 months (range, 1-36 months). None of the investigated psychotherapies were associated with increases in study withdrawals or improvements in retention in treatment compared with treatment as usual. Dialectical behavioral therapies were associated with reductions in self-harm (OR, 0.28; 95% CI, 0.12-0.64) and suicidal ideation (Cohen d SMD, -0.71; 95% CI, -1.19 to -0.23) at the end of treatment, while mentalization-based therapies were associated with decreases in self-harm (OR, 0.38; 95% CI, 0.15-0.97) and suicidal ideation (Cohen d SMD, -1.22; 95% CI, -2.18 to -0.26) at the end of follow-up. The quality of evidence was downgraded because of high risk of bias overall, heterogeneity, publication bias, inconsistency, and imprecision.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Although some psychotherapeutic modalities appear to be acceptable and efficacious for reducing self-harm and suicidality among children and adolescents, methodological issues and high risk of bias prevent a consistent estimate of their comparative performance.

Interventions for self-harm in children and adolescents

BACKGROUND

Self-harm (SH; intentional self-poisoning or self-injury regardless of degree of suicidal intent or other types of motivation) is a growing problem in most countries, often repeated, and associated with suicide. Evidence assessing the effectiveness of interventions in the treatment of SH in children and adolescents is lacking, especially when compared with the evidence for psychosocial interventions in adults. This review therefore updates a previous Cochrane Review (last published in 2015) on the role of interventions for SH in children and adolescents.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of psychosocial interventions or pharmacological agents or natural products for SH compared to comparison types of care (e.g. treatment-as-usual, routine psychiatric care, enhanced usual care, active comparator, placebo, alternative pharmacological treatment, or a combination of these) for children and adolescents (up to 18 years of age) who engage in SH.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Common Mental Disorders Specialized Register, the Cochrane Library (Central Register of Controlled Trials [CENTRAL] and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews [CDSR]), together with MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, and PsycINFO (to 4 July 2020).

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing specific psychosocial interventions or pharmacological agents or natural products with treatment-as-usual (TAU), routine psychiatric care, enhanced usual care (EUC), active comparator, placebo, alternative pharmacological treatment, or a combination of these, in children and adolescents with a recent (within six months of trial entry) episode of SH resulting in presentation to hospital or clinical services. The primary outcome was the occurrence of a repeated episode of SH over a maximum follow-up period of two years. Secondary outcomes included treatment adherence, depression, hopelessness, general functioning, social functioning, suicidal ideation, and suicide.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We independently selected trials, extracted data, and appraised trial quality. For binary outcomes, we calculated odds ratios (ORs) and their 95% confidence internals (CIs). For continuous outcomes, we calculated the mean difference (MD) or standardised mean difference (SMD) and 95% CIs. The overall quality of evidence for the primary outcome (i.e. repetition of SH at post-intervention) was appraised for each intervention using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We included data from 17 trials with a total of 2280 participants. Participants in these trials were predominately female (87.6%) with a mean age of 14.7 years (standard deviation (SD) 1.5 years). The trials included in this review investigated the effectiveness of various forms of psychosocial interventions. None of the included trials evaluated the effectiveness of pharmacological agents in this clinical population. There was a lower rate of SH repetition for DBT-A (30%) as compared to TAU, EUC, or alternative psychotherapy (43%) on repetition of SH at post-intervention in four trials (OR 0.46, 95% CI 0.26 to 0.82; N = 270; k = 4; high-certainty evidence). There may be no evidence of a difference for individual cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT)-based psychotherapy and TAU for repetition of SH at post-intervention (OR 0.93, 95% CI 0.12 to 7.24; N = 51; k = 2; low-certainty evidence). We are uncertain whether mentalisation based therapy for adolescents (MBT-A) reduces repetition of SH at post-intervention as compared to TAU (OR 0.70, 95% CI 0.06 to 8.46; N = 85; k = 2; very low-certainty evidence). Heterogeneity for this outcome was substantial ( I² = 68%). There is probably no evidence of a difference between family therapy and either TAU or EUC on repetition of SH at post-intervention (OR 1.00, 95% CI 0.49 to 2.07; N = 191; k = 2; moderate-certainty evidence). However, there was no evidence of a difference for compliance enhancement approaches on repetition of SH by the six-month follow-up assessment, for group-based psychotherapy at the six- or 12-month follow-up assessments, for a remote contact intervention (emergency cards) at the 12-month assessment, or for therapeutic assessment at the 12- or 24-month follow-up assessments.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Given the moderate or very low quality of the available evidence, and the small number of trials identified, there is only uncertain evidence regarding a number of psychosocial interventions in children and adolescents who engage in SH. Further evaluation of DBT-A is warranted. Given the evidence for its benefit in adults who engage in SH, individual CBT-based psychotherapy should also be further developed and evaluated in children and adolescents.