Gisell Castillo, Gil Angela Dela Cruz, Joe Lebbos, Emilio Fabiano Toala, Fatima Ahmad, Mackenzie Earle, Reena Besa, Anne Kirvan, Cheryl Pereira, Allison Crawford
{"title":"Innovations in Crisis Line Interventions.","authors":"Gisell Castillo, Gil Angela Dela Cruz, Joe Lebbos, Emilio Fabiano Toala, Fatima Ahmad, Mackenzie Earle, Reena Besa, Anne Kirvan, Cheryl Pereira, Allison Crawford","doi":"10.1027/0227-5910/a001063","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b></b> <i>Background:</i> Crisis lines provide evidence-based suicide prevention support that often involves active listening, safety assessment, collaborative problem solving, and sharing resources (care as usual). Many crisis lines are also innovating by providing additional interventions to support service users. <i>Aims</i>: We conducted a scoping review of peer-reviewed literature to understand what crisis line interventions are currently used beyond usual care and which have been evaluated. <i>Methods:</i> We worked with a librarian to develop a comprehensive search strategy applied across six databases (PsycInfo, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Applied Social Sciences Index and Abstracts, and Web of Science). Results were screened by pairs of analysts. Data from eligible sources were extracted using a standardized form and synthesized by type of intervention. <i>Results:</i> We identified 42 relevant studies describing crisis line interventions other than care as usual. Of these, seven evaluated the intervention and four found support for the evaluated intervention. There are single-study evidence in support of: applied suicide intervention skills training (ASIST); a structured safety planning intervention; artificial intelligence (AI) to support messaging; and a crisis line-specific risk assessment scale developed in Beijing. The remaining studies described a variety of interventions including triaging, managing, and de-escalating crises; structured or standardized suicide risk assessment and safety planning; care coordination; and supporting responders using AI. However, these interventions were not formally assessed. <i>Limitations:</i> Variability in how interventions are described, operationalized, delivered, and evaluated limits comparisons across studies. <i>Conclusion:</i> Crisis lines continue to explore ways to meet the needs of the people they serve. However, many approaches have not been formally evaluated. More research and evaluation are needed in real-life contexts where information can be triangulated from various data sources (e.g., crisis line data, responder feedback, user experiences) to evaluate the impact and meaning of a given intervention.</p>","PeriodicalId":47943,"journal":{"name":"Crisis-The Journal of Crisis Intervention and Suicide Prevention","volume":" ","pages":"279-292"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2026-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Crisis-The Journal of Crisis Intervention and Suicide Prevention","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1027/0227-5910/a001063","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/6/30 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Crisis lines provide evidence-based suicide prevention support that often involves active listening, safety assessment, collaborative problem solving, and sharing resources (care as usual). Many crisis lines are also innovating by providing additional interventions to support service users. Aims: We conducted a scoping review of peer-reviewed literature to understand what crisis line interventions are currently used beyond usual care and which have been evaluated. Methods: We worked with a librarian to develop a comprehensive search strategy applied across six databases (PsycInfo, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Applied Social Sciences Index and Abstracts, and Web of Science). Results were screened by pairs of analysts. Data from eligible sources were extracted using a standardized form and synthesized by type of intervention. Results: We identified 42 relevant studies describing crisis line interventions other than care as usual. Of these, seven evaluated the intervention and four found support for the evaluated intervention. There are single-study evidence in support of: applied suicide intervention skills training (ASIST); a structured safety planning intervention; artificial intelligence (AI) to support messaging; and a crisis line-specific risk assessment scale developed in Beijing. The remaining studies described a variety of interventions including triaging, managing, and de-escalating crises; structured or standardized suicide risk assessment and safety planning; care coordination; and supporting responders using AI. However, these interventions were not formally assessed. Limitations: Variability in how interventions are described, operationalized, delivered, and evaluated limits comparisons across studies. Conclusion: Crisis lines continue to explore ways to meet the needs of the people they serve. However, many approaches have not been formally evaluated. More research and evaluation are needed in real-life contexts where information can be triangulated from various data sources (e.g., crisis line data, responder feedback, user experiences) to evaluate the impact and meaning of a given intervention.
背景:危机热线提供基于证据的自杀预防支持,通常包括积极倾听、安全评估、协作解决问题和共享资源(照护)。许多危机热线也在创新,提供额外的干预措施来支持服务用户。目的:我们对同行评议的文献进行了范围审查,以了解目前在常规护理之外使用的危机线干预措施以及已评估的措施。方法:我们与一位图书管理员合作,开发了一个综合搜索策略,应用于六个数据库(PsycInfo, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, applied Social Sciences Index and Abstracts和Web of Science)。结果由分析师对进行筛选。使用标准化表格提取符合条件的数据,并按干预类型进行综合。结果:我们确定了42项相关研究,描述了危机线干预措施,而不是通常的护理。其中,7人对干预措施进行了评估,4人对评估后的干预措施表示支持。有单一研究证据支持:应用自杀干预技能培训(ASIST);结构化的安全规划干预;支持消息传递的人工智能(AI);北京制定了针对危机线的风险评估量表。其余的研究描述了各种干预措施,包括分诊、管理和缓解危机;结构化或标准化的自杀风险评估和安全规划;护理协调;并使用人工智能支持响应人员。然而,这些干预措施并没有被正式评估。局限性:干预措施描述、实施、交付和评估的可变性限制了研究间的比较。结论:危机热线继续探索满足他们所服务的人的需求的方法。然而,许多方法尚未得到正式评估。需要在现实生活中进行更多的研究和评价,在这种情况下,可以从各种数据源(例如,危机线数据、响应者反馈、用户体验)对信息进行三角测量,以评估特定干预措施的影响和意义。
期刊介绍:
A must for all who need to keep up on the latest findings from both basic research and practical experience in the fields of suicide prevention and crisis intervention! This well-established periodical’s reputation for publishing important articles on suicidology and crisis intervention from around the world is being further enhanced with the move to 6 issues per year (previously 4) in 2010. But over and above its scientific reputation, Crisis also publishes potentially life-saving information for all those involved in crisis intervention and suicide prevention, making it important reading for clinicians, counselors, hotlines, and crisis intervention centers.