Cargando…
Does treatment method matter? A meta-analysis of the past 20 years of research on therapeutic interventions for self-harm and suicidal ideation in adolescents
BACKGROUND: Self-harm is a clinically relevant and prevalent behaviour which peaks in adolescence. Given the high prevalence of self-harm, the high levels of psychiatric comorbidity, and its role as a risk factor for suicide, delivering evidence-based care is critical. METHODS: We conducted a system...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7216729/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32426138 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40479-020-00123-9 |
_version_ | 1783532472496029696 |
---|---|
author | Kothgassner, Oswald D. Robinson, Kealagh Goreis, Andreas Ougrin, Dennis Plener, Paul L. |
author_facet | Kothgassner, Oswald D. Robinson, Kealagh Goreis, Andreas Ougrin, Dennis Plener, Paul L. |
author_sort | Kothgassner, Oswald D. |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Self-harm is a clinically relevant and prevalent behaviour which peaks in adolescence. Given the high prevalence of self-harm, the high levels of psychiatric comorbidity, and its role as a risk factor for suicide, delivering evidence-based care is critical. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature on treating self-harm in adolescents (12–19 years) published in the last 20 years, identifying 25 randomised controlled trials. We calculated the effect of treatment interventions relative to active control conditions in reducing self-harm, suicidal ideation and depressive symptoms. RESULTS: Overall, treatment interventions fared slightly better than active controls in decreasing self-harm (d = 0.13, 95% CI 0.04–0.22, p = .004), suicidal ideation (d = 0.31, 95% CI 0.12–0.50, p = .001) and depressive symptoms (d = 0.22, 95% CI 0.07–0.38, p = .006). Subgroup analysis of specific therapies revealed moderate effects of DBT-A in reducing self-harm (d = 0.51, 95% CI 0.18–0.85, p = .002) and suicidal ideation (d = 0.48, 95% CI 0.17–0.80, p = .003), as well as moderate effects of family-centred therapy in the treating suicidal ideation (d = 0.58, 95% CI 0.01–1.15, p = .049). CONCLUSIONS: The findings of our meta-analysis indicate that, overall, currently available treatments are effective in treating self-harm, suicidal ideation, and depressive symptoms in adolescence. Although the treatment intervention conditions showed only small to moderate effects in comparison to active controls, these differences were statistically significant and are clinically important. Further research is needed to understand the reduction in self-harm within active controls, which may arise due to the natural course of self-harm, or the potential efficacy of treatment as usual and enhanced usual care. Given the significant reduction of self-harm in active control conditions, delivering effective care to a large number of adolescents with self-harm may require developing stepped-care models in clinical practice. Expensive and poorly available treatments should be targeted at young people who most need them. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7216729 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-72167292020-05-18 Does treatment method matter? A meta-analysis of the past 20 years of research on therapeutic interventions for self-harm and suicidal ideation in adolescents Kothgassner, Oswald D. Robinson, Kealagh Goreis, Andreas Ougrin, Dennis Plener, Paul L. Borderline Personal Disord Emot Dysregul Review BACKGROUND: Self-harm is a clinically relevant and prevalent behaviour which peaks in adolescence. Given the high prevalence of self-harm, the high levels of psychiatric comorbidity, and its role as a risk factor for suicide, delivering evidence-based care is critical. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature on treating self-harm in adolescents (12–19 years) published in the last 20 years, identifying 25 randomised controlled trials. We calculated the effect of treatment interventions relative to active control conditions in reducing self-harm, suicidal ideation and depressive symptoms. RESULTS: Overall, treatment interventions fared slightly better than active controls in decreasing self-harm (d = 0.13, 95% CI 0.04–0.22, p = .004), suicidal ideation (d = 0.31, 95% CI 0.12–0.50, p = .001) and depressive symptoms (d = 0.22, 95% CI 0.07–0.38, p = .006). Subgroup analysis of specific therapies revealed moderate effects of DBT-A in reducing self-harm (d = 0.51, 95% CI 0.18–0.85, p = .002) and suicidal ideation (d = 0.48, 95% CI 0.17–0.80, p = .003), as well as moderate effects of family-centred therapy in the treating suicidal ideation (d = 0.58, 95% CI 0.01–1.15, p = .049). CONCLUSIONS: The findings of our meta-analysis indicate that, overall, currently available treatments are effective in treating self-harm, suicidal ideation, and depressive symptoms in adolescence. Although the treatment intervention conditions showed only small to moderate effects in comparison to active controls, these differences were statistically significant and are clinically important. Further research is needed to understand the reduction in self-harm within active controls, which may arise due to the natural course of self-harm, or the potential efficacy of treatment as usual and enhanced usual care. Given the significant reduction of self-harm in active control conditions, delivering effective care to a large number of adolescents with self-harm may require developing stepped-care models in clinical practice. Expensive and poorly available treatments should be targeted at young people who most need them. BioMed Central 2020-05-11 /pmc/articles/PMC7216729/ /pubmed/32426138 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40479-020-00123-9 Text en © The Author(s) 2020 Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Review Kothgassner, Oswald D. Robinson, Kealagh Goreis, Andreas Ougrin, Dennis Plener, Paul L. Does treatment method matter? A meta-analysis of the past 20 years of research on therapeutic interventions for self-harm and suicidal ideation in adolescents |
title | Does treatment method matter? A meta-analysis of the past 20 years of research on therapeutic interventions for self-harm and suicidal ideation in adolescents |
title_full | Does treatment method matter? A meta-analysis of the past 20 years of research on therapeutic interventions for self-harm and suicidal ideation in adolescents |
title_fullStr | Does treatment method matter? A meta-analysis of the past 20 years of research on therapeutic interventions for self-harm and suicidal ideation in adolescents |
title_full_unstemmed | Does treatment method matter? A meta-analysis of the past 20 years of research on therapeutic interventions for self-harm and suicidal ideation in adolescents |
title_short | Does treatment method matter? A meta-analysis of the past 20 years of research on therapeutic interventions for self-harm and suicidal ideation in adolescents |
title_sort | does treatment method matter? a meta-analysis of the past 20 years of research on therapeutic interventions for self-harm and suicidal ideation in adolescents |
topic | Review |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7216729/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32426138 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40479-020-00123-9 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT kothgassneroswaldd doestreatmentmethodmatterametaanalysisofthepast20yearsofresearchontherapeuticinterventionsforselfharmandsuicidalideationinadolescents AT robinsonkealagh doestreatmentmethodmatterametaanalysisofthepast20yearsofresearchontherapeuticinterventionsforselfharmandsuicidalideationinadolescents AT goreisandreas doestreatmentmethodmatterametaanalysisofthepast20yearsofresearchontherapeuticinterventionsforselfharmandsuicidalideationinadolescents AT ougrindennis doestreatmentmethodmatterametaanalysisofthepast20yearsofresearchontherapeuticinterventionsforselfharmandsuicidalideationinadolescents AT plenerpaull doestreatmentmethodmatterametaanalysisofthepast20yearsofresearchontherapeuticinterventionsforselfharmandsuicidalideationinadolescents |