The Effectiveness of Dialectical Behavior Therapy in Reducing Self-Directed Violence and Suicidality in Usual Care Settings: A Meta-Analysis

IF 2.7 3区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL
Journal of Clinical Psychology Pub Date : 2026-10-01 Epub Date: 2026-08-01 DOI:10.1002/jclp.70195
Colleen A. Maxwell, Katherine E. Holland, Lauren Young, Eunice Y. Chen, Thomas Olino, Philip C. Kendall
{"title":"The Effectiveness of Dialectical Behavior Therapy in Reducing Self-Directed Violence and Suicidality in Usual Care Settings: A Meta-Analysis","authors":"Colleen A. Maxwell,&nbsp;Katherine E. Holland,&nbsp;Lauren Young,&nbsp;Eunice Y. Chen,&nbsp;Thomas Olino,&nbsp;Philip C. Kendall","doi":"10.1002/jclp.70195","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Dialectical behavior therapy (DBT) has shown efficacy in reducing suicidality, though less is known about its effectiveness when delivered in usual care (UC) settings, where the resource-intensive nature of the program often results in modifications during implementation. This systematic meta-analysis examined the effectiveness of DBT in reducing suicidality-related outcomes when delivered in usual care settings. A systematic search was conducted and studies were identified for inclusion if they evaluated a DBT-based intervention with original, quantitative data reflecting pre- and post-treatment measurement of at least one of the three suicidality-related outcomes: (i) self-directed violence (SDV), (ii) crisis service use (CSU), and (iii) suicidal ideation (SI). Random effects models were used to estimate pooled effects. Meta-regression analyses were used to compare pooled effects across usual care and non-usual care settings and to examine the differential effects of theoretical predictors often involved in treatment modification. The final sample included 83 studies. In uncontrolled studies, DBT was associated with a large reduction in SDV and medium reductions in CSU and SI. In controlled studies, DBT demonstrated a significant effect for SDV but not for CSU or SI. Adjustment for publication bias attenuated the CSU findings. No differences were observed between usual care and non-usual care settings. Substantial heterogeneity was observed across models. In uncontrolled studies, positive associations emerged between therapist training and SDV reduction, adherence reporting and CSU reduction, and outpatient setting and SI reduction. Results provide the strongest support for the effectiveness of DBT in reducing SDV, with more limited and variable evidence for CSU and SI. Results should be interpreted with caution given heterogeneity and evidence of publication bias.</p>","PeriodicalId":15395,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical Psychology","volume":"82 11","pages":"1699-1743"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2026-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/jclp.70195","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Clinical Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jclp.70195","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/8/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Dialectical behavior therapy (DBT) has shown efficacy in reducing suicidality, though less is known about its effectiveness when delivered in usual care (UC) settings, where the resource-intensive nature of the program often results in modifications during implementation. This systematic meta-analysis examined the effectiveness of DBT in reducing suicidality-related outcomes when delivered in usual care settings. A systematic search was conducted and studies were identified for inclusion if they evaluated a DBT-based intervention with original, quantitative data reflecting pre- and post-treatment measurement of at least one of the three suicidality-related outcomes: (i) self-directed violence (SDV), (ii) crisis service use (CSU), and (iii) suicidal ideation (SI). Random effects models were used to estimate pooled effects. Meta-regression analyses were used to compare pooled effects across usual care and non-usual care settings and to examine the differential effects of theoretical predictors often involved in treatment modification. The final sample included 83 studies. In uncontrolled studies, DBT was associated with a large reduction in SDV and medium reductions in CSU and SI. In controlled studies, DBT demonstrated a significant effect for SDV but not for CSU or SI. Adjustment for publication bias attenuated the CSU findings. No differences were observed between usual care and non-usual care settings. Substantial heterogeneity was observed across models. In uncontrolled studies, positive associations emerged between therapist training and SDV reduction, adherence reporting and CSU reduction, and outpatient setting and SI reduction. Results provide the strongest support for the effectiveness of DBT in reducing SDV, with more limited and variable evidence for CSU and SI. Results should be interpreted with caution given heterogeneity and evidence of publication bias.

辩证行为疗法在减少日常护理环境中自我导向暴力和自杀的有效性:一项荟萃分析。
辩证行为疗法(DBT)已显示出降低自杀率的功效,尽管其在常规护理(UC)环境中的有效性尚不清楚,在常规护理(UC)环境中,该计划的资源密集型性质经常导致在实施过程中进行修改。本系统荟萃分析检验了在常规护理环境中实施DBT降低自杀相关结果的有效性。进行了系统搜索,如果研究评估了基于dbt的干预措施,并使用原始的定量数据反映了治疗前和治疗后对三种自杀相关结果中的至少一种的测量,则确定纳入研究:(i)自我导向暴力(SDV), (ii)危机服务使用(CSU)和(iii)自杀意念(SI)。随机效应模型用于估计合并效应。荟萃回归分析用于比较常规护理和非常规护理环境的综合效应,并检查通常涉及治疗修改的理论预测因子的差异效应。最终样本包括83项研究。在非对照研究中,DBT与SDV的大幅度降低和CSU和SI的中度降低相关。在对照研究中,DBT显示出对SDV的显著影响,但对CSU或SI没有显著影响。校正发表偏倚削弱了CSU的发现。在常规护理和非常规护理环境之间没有观察到差异。各模型之间存在很大的异质性。在非对照研究中,治疗师培训与SDV减少、依从性报告与CSU减少、门诊设置与SI减少之间出现正相关。结果为DBT降低SDV的有效性提供了最有力的支持,CSU和SI的证据更有限和可变。考虑到异质性和证据发表偏倚,对结果的解释应谨慎。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Clinical Psychology
Journal of Clinical Psychology PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL-
CiteScore
5.40
自引率
3.30%
发文量
177
期刊介绍: Founded in 1945, the Journal of Clinical Psychology is a peer-reviewed forum devoted to research, assessment, and practice. Published eight times a year, the Journal includes research studies; articles on contemporary professional issues, single case research; brief reports (including dissertations in brief); notes from the field; and news and notes. In addition to papers on psychopathology, psychodiagnostics, and the psychotherapeutic process, the journal welcomes articles focusing on psychotherapy effectiveness research, psychological assessment and treatment matching, clinical outcomes, clinical health psychology, and behavioral medicine.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书