Using a Safety Planning Mobile App to Address Suicidality in Young People Attending Community Mental Health Services in Ireland: Protocol for a Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Over 700,000 people die by suicide annually, making it the fourth leading cause of death among those aged 15-29 years globally. Safety planning is recommended best practice when individuals at risk of suicide present to health services. A safety plan, developed in collaboration with a health care practitioner, details the steps to be taken in an emotional crisis. SafePlan, a safety planning mobile app, was designed to support young people experiencing suicidal thoughts and behaviors and to record their plan in a way that is accessible immediately and in situ. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to assess the feasibility and acceptability of the SafePlan mobile app for patients experiencing suicidal thoughts and behaviors and their clinicians within Irish community mental health services, examine the feasibility of study procedures for both patients and clinicians, and determine if the SafePlan condition yields superior outcomes when compared with the control condition. METHODS: A total of 80 participants aged 16-35 years accessing Irish mental health services will be randomized (1:1) to receive the SafePlan app plus treatment as usual or treatment as usual plus a paper-based safety plan. The feasibility and acceptability of the SafePlan app and study procedures will be evaluated using both qualitative and quantitative methodologies. The primary outcomes are feasibility outcomes and include the acceptability of the app to participants and clinicians, the feasibility of delivery in this setting, recruitment, retention, and app use. The feasibility and acceptability of the following measures in a full randomized controlled trial will also be assessed: the Beck Scale for Suicide Ideation, Columbia Suicide Severity Rating Scale, Coping Self-Efficacy Scale, Interpersonal Needs Questionnaire, and Client Service Receipt Inventory. A repeated measures design with outcome data collected at baseline, post intervention (8 weeks), and at 6-month follow-up will be used to compare changes in suicidal ideation for the intervention condition relative to the waitlist control condition. A cost-outcome description will also be undertaken. Thematic analyses will be used to analyze the qualitative data gathered through semistructured interviews with patients and clinicians. RESULTS: As of January 2023, funding and ethics approval have been acquired, and clinician champions across mental health service sites have been established. Data collection is expected to commence by April 2023. The submission of completed manuscript is expected by April 2025. CONCLUSIONS: The framework for Decision-making after Pilot and feasibility Trials will inform the decision to progress to a full trial. The results will inform patients, researchers, clinicians, and health services of the feasibility and acceptability of the SafePlan app in community mental health services. The findings will have implications for further research and policy regarding the broader integration of safety planning apps. TRIAL REGISTRATION: OSF Registries osf.io/3y54m; https://osf.io/3y54m. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): PRR1-10.2196/44205.

Mobile Health Technology Interventions for Suicide Prevention: Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Digital interventions are proposed as one way by which effective treatments for self-harm and suicidal ideation may be improved and their scalability enhanced. Mobile devices offer a potentially powerful medium to deliver evidence-based interventions with greater specificity to the individual when the intervention is needed. The recent proliferation of publicly available mobile apps designed for suicide prevention underlines the need for robust evidence to promote safe practice. OBJECTIVE: This review aimed to examine the effectiveness of currently available mobile health (mHealth) technology tools in reducing suicide-specific outcomes. METHODS: The following databases were searched: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library), MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, and relevant sources of gray literature. All published and unpublished randomized controlled trials (RCTs), pseudo-RCTs, and pre-post observational studies that evaluated the effectiveness of mHealth technology in suicide prevention delivered via mobile computing and communication technology were included. Studies were included if they measured at least one suicide outcome variable (ie, suicidal ideation, suicidal intent, nonsuicidal self-injurious behavior, and suicidal behavior). A total of 2 review authors independently extracted data and assessed study suitability, in accordance with the Cochrane Collaboration Risk of Bias Tool, on July 31, 2018. Owing to the heterogeneity of outcomes found across studies, results were not amenable for pooled synthesis, and a meta-analysis was not performed. A narrative synthesis of the available research is presented here. RESULTS: A total of 7 studies met criteria for inclusion . Four published articles that reported on the effectiveness of the following mobile phone apps were included: iBobbly, Virtual Hope Box, BlueIce, and Therapeutic Evaluative Conditioning. Results demonstrated some positive impacts for individuals at elevated risk of suicide or self-harm, including reductions in depression, psychological distress, and self-harm and increases in coping self-efficacy. None of the apps evaluated demonstrated the ability to significantly decrease suicidal ideation compared with a control condition. In addition, 3 unpublished and recently completed trials also met criteria for inclusion in the review. CONCLUSIONS: Further research is needed to evaluate the efficacy of stand-alone mHealth technology-based interventions in suicide prevention. The small number of studies reported in this review tentatively indicate that such tools may have a positive impact on suicide-specific outcomes. Future mHealth intervention evaluations would benefit from addressing the following 3 main methodological limitations : (1) heterogeneity of outcomes: a lack of standardized measurement of suicide outcomes across studies; (2) ecological validity: the tendency to exclude potential participants because of the elevated suicide risk may reduce generalizability within clinical settings; and (3) app regulation and definition: the lack of a standardized classification system for mHealth intervention type points to the need for better definition of the scope of such technologies to promote safe practice. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42017072899; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=72899. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): RR2-10.2196/resprot.8635.

The Validity of Google Trends Search Volumes for Behavioral Forecasting of National Suicide Rates in Ireland.

Annual suicide figures are critical in identifying trends and guiding research, yet challenges arising from significant lags in reporting can delay and complicate real-time interventions. In this paper, we utilized Google Trends search volumes for behavioral forecasting of national suicide rates in Ireland between 2004 and 2015. Official suicide rates are recorded by the Central Statistics Office in Ireland. While similar investigations using Google trends data have been carried out in other jurisdictions (e.g., United Kingdom, United Stated of America), such research had not yet been completed in Ireland. We compiled a collection of suicide- and depression-related search terms suggested by Google Trends and manually sourced from the literature. Monthly search rate terms at different lags were compared with suicide occurrences to determine the degree of correlation. Following two approaches based on vector autoregression and neural network autoregression, we achieved mean absolute error values between 4.14 and 9.61 when incorporating search query data, with the highest performance for the neural network approach. The application of this process to United Kingdom suicide and search query data showed similar results, supporting the benefit of Google Trends, neural network approach, and the applied search terms to forecast suicide risk increase. Overall, the combination of societal data and online behavior provide a good indication of societal risks; building on past research, our improvements led to robust models integrating search query and unemployment data for suicide risk forecasting in Ireland.

An Evaluation of the Effectiveness of the Modalities Used to Deliver Electronic Health Interventions for Chronic Pain: Systematic Review With Network Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Electronic health (eHealth) is the use of information and communication technology in the context of health care and health research. Recently, there has been a rise in the number of eHealth modalities and the frequency with which they are used to deliver technology-assisted self-management interventions for people living with chronic pain. However, there has been little or no research directly comparing these eHealth modalities. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this systematic review with a network meta-analysis (NMA) is to compare the effectiveness of eHealth modalities in the context of chronic pain. METHODS: Randomized controlled trials (N>20 per arm) that investigated interventions for adults with chronic pain, delivered via an eHealth modality, were included. Included studies were categorized into their primary node of delivery. Data were extracted on the primary outcome, pain interference, and secondary outcomes, pain severity, psychological distress, and health-related quality of life. Pairwise meta-analyses were undertaken where possible, and an NMA was conducted to generate indirect comparisons and rankings of modalities for reducing pain interference. RESULTS: The search returned 18,470 studies with 18,349 being excluded (duplicates=2310; title and abstract=16,039). Of the remaining papers, 30 studies with 5394 randomized participants were included in the review. Rankings tentatively indicated that modern eHealth modalities are the most effective, with a 43% chance that mobile apps delivered the most effective interventions, followed by a 34% chance that interventions delivered via virtual reality were the most effective. CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review with an NMA generated comparisons between eHealth modalities previously not compared to determine which delivered the most effective interventions for the reduction of pain interference in chronic pain patients. There are limitations with this review, in particular, the underrepresented nature of some eHealth modalities included in the analysis. However, in the event that the review is regularly updated, a clear ranking of eHealth modalities for the reduction of pain interference will emerge.

Investigating the effectiveness of an online acceptance and commitment therapy (ACT) intervention versus a waiting list control condition on pain interference and quality of life in adults with chronic pain and multimorbidity: protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Multimorbidity refers to the presence of two or more chronic health conditions within one person, where no one condition is primary. Research suggests that multimorbidity is highly correlated with chronic pain, which is pain lasting longer than 3 months. Psychotherapeutic interventions for people living with chronic illness have resulted in reduced symptom reporting and improved psychological well-being. There is a dearth of research, however, using online psychotherapy for people living with multimorbidity where chronic pain is a central condition. This study will compare the effectiveness of an online acceptance and commitment therapy (ACT) intervention with a waiting list control condition in terms of improving health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and reducing levels of pain interference in people with chronic pain and at least one other condition. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: 192 adult participants with non-malignant pain that persists for at least 3 months and at least one other medically diagnosed condition will be randomised to one of two study conditions. The experimental group will undergo an eight-session internet-delivered ACT programme over an 8-week period. A waiting list group will be offered the ACT intervention after the 3-month follow-up period. HRQoL and pain interference will act as the primary outcomes. Data will be analysed using a linear mixed model and adjusted to account for demographic and clinical variables as necessary. A Study Within a Trial will be incorporated to examine the effect on recruitment and retention of showing participants an animated educational video. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval has been granted by the Research Ethics Committee of the National University of Ireland, Galway. Dissemination of results will be via peer reviewed journal articles and conference presentations. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN22343024.

Interactive Versus Passive Distraction and Parent Psychoeducation as Pain Management Techniques During Pediatric Venepuncture: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of the current research was to compare the relative efficacy of interactive and passive distraction, with or without parental psychoeducation, on child pain and distress during a venepuncture. We also compared the effect of parental psychoeducation on parental distress, knowledge of distraction strategies, and engagement in distraction. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This cross-sectional study included 213 children scheduled for a venepuncture, and one of their parents, who were randomly allocated to 1 of 4 conditions; interactive distraction, passive distraction, interactive distraction with parent psychoeducation, and passive distraction with parent psychoeducation. Analyses of covariances were used to investigate the impact of distraction type and the use of parent psychoeducation on child and parent pain-related outcome variables. RESULTS: Statistical analyses revealed no significant differences between groups for child-reported pain and distress. The parents of children who received interactive distraction reported significantly higher levels of distress than the parents of children who received passive distraction. Parents who received parent psychoeducation had a significantly higher level of knowledge than parents who did not receive psychoeducation, but did not engage in more effective pain management behavior. CONCLUSIONS: The results indicated that distraction type did not have a significantly different influence on child pain-related outcome variables. In addition, while psychoeducation was demonstrated to be effective in increasing parental knowledge, it was not sufficient to change parental behavior.

Mobile Health Technology Interventions for Suicide Prevention: Protocol for a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Previous research has reported that two of the major barriers to help-seeking for individuals at risk of suicide are stigma and geographical isolation. Mobile technology offers a potential means of delivering evidence-based interventions with greater specificity to the individual, and at the time that it is needed. Despite documented motivation by at-risk individuals to use mobile technology to track mental health and to support psychological interventions, there is a shortfall of outcomes data on the efficacy of mobile health (mHealth) technology on suicide-specific outcomes. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study is to develop a protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis that aims to evaluate the effectiveness of mobile technology-based interventions for suicide prevention. METHODS: The search includes the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL: The Cochrane Library), MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CRESP and relevant sources of gray literature. Studies that have evaluated psychological or nonpsychological interventions delivered via mobile computing and communication technology, and have suicidality as an outcome measure will be included. Two authors will independently extract data and assess the study suitability in accordance with the Cochrane Collaboration Risk of Bias Tool. Studies will be included if they measure at least one suicide outcome variable (ie, suicidal ideation, suicidal intent, nonsuicidal self-injurious behavior, suicidal behavior). Secondary outcomes will be measures of symptoms of depression. Where studies are sufficiently homogenous and reported outcomes are amenable for pooled synthesis, meta-analysis will be performed. A narrative synthesis will be conducted if the data is unsuitable for a meta-analysis. RESULTS: The review is in progress, with findings expected by summer 2018. CONCLUSIONS: To date, evaluations of mobile technology-based interventions in suicide prevention have focused on evaluating content as opposed to efficacy. Indeed, previous research has identified mobile applications that appear to present harmful content. The current review will address a gap in the literature by evaluating the efficacy of stand-alone mobile technology tools in suicide prevention. It is imperative that research identifies the evidence base for such tools in suicide prevention in order to inform policy, guide clinical practice, inform users and focus future research. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews CRD42017072899; https:// www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.asp?ID=CRD42017072899  (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/ 6tZAj0yqJ).

Protocol for a systematic review with network meta-analysis of the modalities used to deliver eHealth interventions for chronic pain.

BACKGROUND: As eHealth interventions prove both efficacious and practical, and as they arguably overcome certain barriers encountered by traditional face-to-face treatment for chronic pain, their number has increased dramatically in recent times. However, there is a dearth of research that focuses on evaluating and comparing the different types of technology-assisted interventions. This is a protocol for a systematic review that aims to evaluate the eHealth modalities in the context of psychological and non-psychological (other than non-drug) interventions for chronic pain. METHODS/DESIGN: We will search the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL: The Cochrane Library), MEDLINE, Embase and PsycINFO. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) with more than 20 participants per trial arm that have evaluated non-drug psychological or non-psychological interventions delivered via an eHealth modality and have pain as an outcome measure will be included. Two review authors will independently extract data and assess the study suitability in accordance with the Cochrane Collaboration Risk of Bias Tool. Studies will be included if they measure at least one outcome variable in accordance with the IMMPACT guidelines (i.e. pain severity, pain interference, physical functioning, symptoms, emotional functioning, global improvement and disposition). Secondary outcomes will be measures of depression and health-related quality of life (HRQoL). A network meta-analysis will be conducted based on direct comparisons to generate indirect comparisons of modalities across treatment trials, which will return rankings for the eHealth modalities in terms of their effectiveness. DISCUSSION: Most trials that use an eHealth intervention to manage chronic pain typically use one modality. As a result, little evidence exists to support which modality type is the most effective. The current review will address this gap in the literature and compare the different eHealth modalities used for technology-assisted interventions for chronic pain. With the growing reliance and use of technology as a medium for delivering treatment for chronic conditions more generally, it is imperative that research identify the most efficacious eHealth modalities and systematically identify the most important features of such treatment types, so they may be replicated and used for research and in the provision of care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO, CRD42016035595.