No abstract

Of the small proportion of adolescents who seek help for their self-harm, informal sources are the most likely support systems accessed. Interpersonal barriers and a lack of knowledge about where to go for help may impede help-seeking. Future research should address the lack of knowledge regarding the facilitators of help-seeking behaviour in order to improve the ability of services to engage with this vulnerable group of young people.

Purpose of review Suicide is the second leading cause of death in youth aged 10–24 years old globally, but detecting those at risk is challenging. Novel preventive strategies with wide influence across populations are required. Interest in the potential for both detrimental and supportive influences of social media/internet use on suicidal behaviour has been growing; however, the relationship remains unclear. Recent findings A systematic search of articles from database inception up to 25 January 2019 across five databases: Medline, PsycINFO, EMBASE, HMIC and CINAHL revealed nine independent studies investigating social media/internet use and suicide attempts in young people less than 19 years old (n = 346 416). An independent direct association was found between heavy social media/internet use and increased suicide attempts in seven studies (adjusted ORs ranged from 1.03 to 5.10), although adjusting for cyberbullying victimization and sleep disturbance reduced the strength of this association. Two studies found that some social media/internet use, versus no use, may be associated with fewer suicide attempts. There were no studies investigating the relationship between social media/internet use and completed suicide. Summary There is an independent association between problematic use of social media/internet and suicide attempts in young people. However, the direction of causality, if any, remains unclear. Further evaluation through longitudinal studies is needed.

BackgroundThere is growing evidence of the effectiveness of Cognitive Behavioural Therapy (CBT) for a wide range of psychological disorders. There is a continued controversy about whether challenging maladaptive thoughts rather than use of behavioural interventions alone is associated with the greatest efficacy. However little is known about the relative efficacy of various components of CBT. This review aims to compare the relative efficacy of Cognitive Therapy (CT) versus Exposure (E) for a range of anxiety disorders using the most clinically relevant outcome measures and estimating the summary relative efficacy by combining the studies in a meta-analysis.MethodsPsych INFO, MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched from the first available year to May 2010. All randomised controlled studies comparing the efficacy of exposure with cognitive therapy were included. Odds ratios (OR) or standardised means' differences (Hedges' g) for the most clinically relevant primary outcomes were calculated. Outcomes of the studies were grouped according to specific disorders and were combined in meta-analyses exploring short-term and long-term outcomes.Results20 Randomised Controlled Trials with (n = 1,308) directly comparing the efficacy of CT and E in anxiety disorders were included in the meta-analysis. No statistically significant difference in the relative efficacy of CT and E was revealed in Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), in Obsessive Compulsive Disorder (OCD) and in Panic Disorder (PD). There was a statistically significant difference favouring CT versus E in Social Phobia both in the short-term (Z = 3.72, p = 0.0002) and the long-term (Z = 3.28, p = 0.001) outcomes.ConclusionsOn the basis of extant literature, there appears to be no evidence of differential efficacy between cognitive therapy and exposure in PD, PTSD and OCD and strong evidence of superior efficacy of cognitive therapy in social phobia

ISRCTN 81605131 http://www.controlled-trials.com/ISRCTN81605131/.

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).

SummaryBackgroundIntensive 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.MethodsEligible 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.FindingsHospital 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.InterpretationSDS 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.FundingSouth London and Maudsley NHS Trust.

Further research is urgently needed to develop TIs for treating self-harm in adolescents. MST has shown promise but needs to be evaluated in a sample of adolescents with self-harm; dialectic behavioural therapy and cognitive behavioural therapy for self-harm require RCTs to evaluate efficacy and effectiveness.