Moa Karemyr, Martin Bellander, Moa Pontén, Anna Ohlis, Oskar Flygare, Ylva Walldén, Ralf Kuja-Halkola, Gergö Hadlaczky, David Mataix-Cols, Joan Rosenbaum Asarnow, Clara Hellner, Jennifer L Hughes, Johan Bjureberg
{"title":"Preventing suicide with Safe Alternatives for Teens and Youths (SAFETY): a randomised feasibility trial.","authors":"Moa Karemyr, Martin Bellander, Moa Pontén, Anna Ohlis, Oskar Flygare, Ylva Walldén, Ralf Kuja-Halkola, Gergö Hadlaczky, David Mataix-Cols, Joan Rosenbaum Asarnow, Clara Hellner, Jennifer L Hughes, Johan Bjureberg","doi":"10.1136/bmjment-2025-301575","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Suicide attempts are common in youth and have potentially lethal outcomes. Effective treatments targeting suicide attempts are scarce.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To assess the feasibility and preliminary efficacy of a family-based cognitive behavioural treatment relative to an active control for youth with suicidal behaviour.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>30 youths (93% female; mean (SD) age=14.6 (1.5) years) residing in Sweden with recent suicidal behaviour (last 3 months) and at least one available parent were randomised to 12 weeks of the family-based cognitive behavioural treatment Safe Alternatives for Teens and Youths (SAFETY) or supportive therapy, an active control treatment. Primary endpoint was 3-month post-treatment. Feasibility outcomes included treatment and assessment compliance, adverse events, treatment credibility and treatment satisfaction. Secondary outcomes included suicide attempt, non-suicidal self-injury, anxiety, depression, quality of life and emotion dysregulation.</p><p><strong>Findings: </strong>Both treatments showed high compliance, satisfaction, credibility and session completion, with few adverse events and dropouts as well as low attrition (7% at primary endpoint). At the primary endpoint, two (14%) participants in SAFETY and four (27%) in supportive therapy had attempted suicide. Non-suicidal self-injury was reduced by 95% (incidence rate ratio=0.05 (95% CI 0.01 to 0.20)) in SAFETY and 69% (incidence rate ratio=0.31 (0.11 to 0.83)) in supportive therapy. Participation in SAFETY, but not in supportive therapy, was associated with moderate-to-large within-group improvements in anxiety and depression (Cohen's d=0.85 [0.33 to 1.40]), quality of life (d<i>=</i>1.01 [0.48 to 1.56]) and emotion dysregulation (d=1.22 [0.45 to 2.03]).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The results suggest that SAFETY is feasible and promising for youth with suicidal behaviour.</p><p><strong>Clinical implications: </strong>A large randomised controlled trial is warranted to further examine the efficacy of SAFETY.</p><p><strong>Trial registration number: </strong>NCT05537623.</p>","PeriodicalId":72434,"journal":{"name":"BMJ mental health","volume":"28 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12049871/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMJ mental health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjment-2025-301575","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Suicide attempts are common in youth and have potentially lethal outcomes. Effective treatments targeting suicide attempts are scarce.
Objective: To assess the feasibility and preliminary efficacy of a family-based cognitive behavioural treatment relative to an active control for youth with suicidal behaviour.
Methods: 30 youths (93% female; mean (SD) age=14.6 (1.5) years) residing in Sweden with recent suicidal behaviour (last 3 months) and at least one available parent were randomised to 12 weeks of the family-based cognitive behavioural treatment Safe Alternatives for Teens and Youths (SAFETY) or supportive therapy, an active control treatment. Primary endpoint was 3-month post-treatment. Feasibility outcomes included treatment and assessment compliance, adverse events, treatment credibility and treatment satisfaction. Secondary outcomes included suicide attempt, non-suicidal self-injury, anxiety, depression, quality of life and emotion dysregulation.
Findings: Both treatments showed high compliance, satisfaction, credibility and session completion, with few adverse events and dropouts as well as low attrition (7% at primary endpoint). At the primary endpoint, two (14%) participants in SAFETY and four (27%) in supportive therapy had attempted suicide. Non-suicidal self-injury was reduced by 95% (incidence rate ratio=0.05 (95% CI 0.01 to 0.20)) in SAFETY and 69% (incidence rate ratio=0.31 (0.11 to 0.83)) in supportive therapy. Participation in SAFETY, but not in supportive therapy, was associated with moderate-to-large within-group improvements in anxiety and depression (Cohen's d=0.85 [0.33 to 1.40]), quality of life (d=1.01 [0.48 to 1.56]) and emotion dysregulation (d=1.22 [0.45 to 2.03]).
Conclusions: The results suggest that SAFETY is feasible and promising for youth with suicidal behaviour.
Clinical implications: A large randomised controlled trial is warranted to further examine the efficacy of SAFETY.