Efficacy and sustainability of dialectical behaviour therapy for inpatient adolescents:a follow-up study

作     者：Alison Ann Tebbett-Mock Madeline McGee Ema Saito Alison Ann Tebbett-Mock;Madeline McGee;Ema Saito

作者机构：PsychiatryZucker Hillside HospitalNorthwell HealthGlen OaksNew YorkUSA 

出 版 物：《General Psychiatry》 (综合精神医学（英文）)

年 卷 期：2021年第34卷第4期

页      面：51-59页

核心收录：

学科分类：0402[教育学-心理学(可授教育学、理学学位）] 1004[医学-公共卫生与预防医学(可授医学、理学学位)] 1002[医学-临床医学] 1001[医学-基础医学(可授医学、理学学位)] 100205[医学-精神病与精神卫生学] 10[医学] 1009[医学-特种医学] 

主　　题：behaviour admitted diagnosis 

摘      要：Background Dialectical behaviour therapy(DBT)is an evidence-based treatment for adolescents targeting suicidal and non-suicidal self-injurious behaviours.Research supports DBT’s efficacy in inpatient settings,but implementation and sustainability are understudied.Aims This study is a follow-up of a previous study by Tebbett-Mock et al and examines the efficacy and sustainability of an adolescent DBT inpatient unit within a psychiatric hospital in the Northeast.We hypothesised that adolescents who received DBT in our follow-up group(DBT Group 2)would not have statistical difference(ie,greater or fewer)of the following compared with the first group of patients who received DBT on the unit the year prior(DBT Group 1)and would have significantly fewer of the following compared with the treatment as usual(TAU)group:(1)constant observation hours for suicidal ideation,self-injury and aggression;(2)incidents of suicide attempts,self-injury and aggression;(3)restraints;(4)seclusions;(5)days hospitalised;(6)times readmitted to the unit within 30 days of discharge.Methods We conducted a retrospective chart review for adolescents receiving inpatient DBT(DBT Group 1,n=425;DBT Group 2,n=393)and a historical control group(TAU,n=376).The χ^(2) tests and one-way analysis of variance were conducted as preliminary analyses to examine group differences on diagnosis,gender and age.Kruskal-Wallis H tests were conducted to examine group differences on outcomes.Mann-Whitney U tests were used as post hoc analyses.Results Patients in DBT Group 2 were comparable to DBT Group 1 for the number of constant observation hours for self-injury(U=83432.50,p=0.901),restraints(U=82109,p=0.171)and days hospitalised(U=83438.5,p=0.956).Patients in DBT Group 2 had a significantly greater number of incidents of suicide attempts compared with DBT Group 1(U=82662.5,p=0.037)and of self-injury compared with patients in DBT Group 1(U=71724.5,p0.001)and TAU(U=65649.0,p0.001).Conclusions Results provide support for adolescent inpatient DBT compared with TAU and highlight staff turnover and lack of training as potential barriers to sustainability and efficacy.