O'Connor Edward, Rhodes Kate, Procter Nicholas, Loughhead Mark, Procter Alexandra, Reilly Julie-Anne, Pettit Sophie, Ferguson Monika
Mental Health and Suicide Prevention Research and Education Group, Clinical and Health Sciences, University of South Australia, Adelaide, SA, Australia.
Health & Biosecurity, Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation, Adelaide, SA, Australia.
Front Psychiatry. 2024 Dec 20;15:1482924. doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2024.1482924. eCollection 2024.
The Safety Planning Intervention (SPI) is an efficacious brief intervention for supporting people experiencing suicidal ideation and behavior. However, the subjective experiences of those who have used the SPI have not been systematically evaluated. This systematic review synthesized qualitative evidence regarding the experiences of people involved in the SPI.
Systematic searches of international, peer-reviewed, English language literature were conducted in seven databases (CINAHL, Embase, Emcare, MEDLINE, PsycInfo, Scopus and Web of Science).
A total of 588 articles were screened for eligibility, with screening, data extraction, and critical appraisal conducted in duplicate. Qualitative data were extracted from 10 included studies and synthesized via meta-aggregation. Ninety individual findings were aggregated into 14 unique categories, with categories subsequently combined to produce four synthesized findings: acceptability and positive outcomes associated with the SPI; maximizing the effectiveness of the SPI; navigating the involvement of support persons in the SPI process; barriers and limitations associated with the SPI.
Collectively, findings indicate that the SPI is viewed as beneficial by users and can be enhanced through clinicians' use of a person-centered, collaborative approach, as well as through the inclusion of support persons. Future research should seek lived experience understandings from more diverse stakeholders, particularly regarding consumers' experiences of using the SPI during acute distress. Further research is required to investigate causal pathways between SPI engagement and improved outcomes.
https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42022312425, identifier CRD42022312425.
安全计划干预(SPI)是一种有效的简短干预措施,用于支持有自杀意念和行为的人。然而,使用过SPI的人的主观体验尚未得到系统评估。本系统评价综合了关于参与SPI的人的体验的定性证据。
在七个数据库(CINAHL、Embase、Emcare、MEDLINE、PsycInfo、Scopus和Web of Science)中对国际同行评审的英文文献进行系统检索。
共筛选了588篇文章以确定其是否符合资格,并进行了重复的筛选、数据提取和批判性评价。从10项纳入研究中提取定性数据,并通过元聚合进行综合。90个个体研究结果被汇总为14个独特类别,随后这些类别被合并以产生四个综合研究结果:与SPI相关的可接受性和积极结果;最大化SPI的有效性;引导支持人员参与SPI过程;与SPI相关的障碍和局限性。
总体而言,研究结果表明SPI被用户视为有益的,并且可以通过临床医生采用以患者为中心的协作方法以及纳入支持人员来加以改进。未来的研究应该从更多样化的利益相关者那里寻求对实际体验的理解,特别是关于消费者在急性痛苦期间使用SPI的体验。需要进一步的研究来调查SPI参与和改善结果之间的因果途径。
https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42022312425,标识符CRD42022312425。