Assessing the Reliability of the CAMS Rating Scale Using a Generalizability Study

The use of CAMS and DBT to effectively treat patients who are suicidal

Around the world, suicide ideation, attempts, and deaths pose a major public and mental health challenge for patients (and their loved ones). Accordingly, there is a clear need for effective clinical treatments that reliably reduce suicidal thoughts and behaviors. In this article, we review the Collaborative Assessment and Management of Suicidality (CAMS) and Dialectical Behavior Therapy (DBT), two clinical treatments that rise to the highest levels of empirical rigor. Both CAMS and DBT are now supported by randomized controlled trials (RCTs), with independent replications, and meta-analyses. There are also supportive data related to training clinical providers to use CAMS and DBT with adherence. RCTs that investigate the use of both interventions within clinical trial research designs and the increasing use of these complementary approaches within routine clinical practice are discussed. Future directions for research and clinical use of CAMS and DBT are explored as means to effectively treat suicidal risk.

The Collaborative Assessment and Management of Suicidality compared to enhanced treatment as usual for inpatients who are suicidal: A randomized controlled trial

Background

Although use of inpatient crisis hospital intervention for suicide risk is common, the evidence for inpatient treatments that reduce suicidal thoughts and behaviors is remarkably limited. To address this need, this novel feasibility pilot randomized controlled trial compared the use of the Collaborative Assessment and Management of Suicidality (CAMS) to enhanced treatment as usual (E-TAU) within a standard acute inpatient mental health care setting.

Objectives

We hypothesized that CAMS would be more effective than E-TAU in reducing suicidal thoughts and behaviors. As secondary outcomes we also investigated depressive symptoms, general symptom burden, reasons for living, and quality of the therapeutic relationship.

Methods

All patients were admitted due to acute suicidal thoughts or behaviors. They were randomly assigned to CAMS (n = 43) or E-TAU (n = 45) and assessed at four time points (admission, discharge, 1 month and 5 months after discharge). We used mixed-effects models, effect sizes, and reliable change analyses to compare improvements across and between treatment groups over time.

Results

Intent-to-treat analyses of 88 participants [mean age 32.1, SD = 13.5; n = 47 (53%) females] showed that both groups improved over time across all outcome measures with no significant between-group differences in terms of change in suicidal ideation, depression, reasons for living, and distress. However, CAMS showed larger effect sizes across all measures; for treatment completers CAMS patients showed significant improvement in suicidal ideation (p = 0.01) in comparison to control patients. CAMS patients rated the therapeutic relationship significantly better (p = 0.02) than E-TAU patients and were less likely to attempt suicide within 4 weeks after discharge (p = 0.05).

Conclusions

CAMS and E-TAU were both effective in reducing suicidal thoughts and symptom distress. Within this feasibility RCT the pattern of results was generally supportive of CAMS suggesting that inpatient use of CAMS is both feasible and promising. However, our preliminary results need further replication within well-powered multi-site randomized controlled trials.

Trial registration

DRKS-ID/ICTRP-ID: DRKS00013727. The trial was retrospectively registered in the German Clinical Trials Register, registration code/ DRKS-ID: DRKS00013727 on 12.01.2018 and also in the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform of the World Health Organization (identical registration code).

A Randomized Controlled Trial of the Collaborative Assessment and Management of Suicidality (CAMS) Versus Treatment as Usual (TAU) for Suicidal College Students

This randomized controlled trial compared the Collaborative Assessment and Management of Suicidality (CAMS) and Treatment as Usual (TAU) for suicidal college students within a feasibility trial. Sixty-two suicidal college students were randomized to CAMS (n = 33) or TAU (n = 29). We hypothesized that those receiving CAMS would show more improvement in suicide-related measures, and effects would be moderated by borderline personality disorder (BPD), prior suicide attempts, and age. Both treatment groups showed improvements in all outcome variables; CAMS had a significantly higher impact on depression and suicidal ideation when measured weekly during care and was more likely than TAU to decrease hopelessness among students with fewer BPD features, no suicide attempt history, and older age. Conversely, TAU did better for students with BPD features and history of multiple suicide attempts.

Collaborative Assessment and Management of Suicidality for Teens: A Promising Frontline Intervention for Addressing Adolescent Suicidality

This pilot open trial examined the feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary outcomes of the Collaborative Assessment and Management of Suicidality for teens (CAMS-4Teens) who presented to outpatient care with suicidal thoughts and behaviors. Participants were 22 adolescents (13-17; 59% identified as female) with clinical elevations (≥7) on the Suicidal Behaviors Questionnaire-Revised (SBQ-R). Primary outcomes were feasibility and acceptability. We also explored outcomes of suicidal thoughts and behaviors, as well as mixed effects modeling for weekly assessments of the Suicide Status Form (SSF) Core Assessment constructs. Our main implementation outcomes suggest that the intervention is acceptable, appropriate, and feasible to deliver. Clinicians were adherent to the model with high ratings of adherence. In addition, preliminary evaluation of suicidal thoughts and behaviors found a large effect size for reduction in suicidal thoughts. Benchmarking to other adolescent suicide specific interventions and the Collaborative Assessment of Management of Suicidality with adult populations provide promise that suicidal adolescent responses may be on par with established interventions. Findings from the study are preliminary in nature and intended to inform if CAMS with adolescents is a promising approach to engage and treat patient-defined "drivers" of suicide. The results suggest that a future investigation with power to detect significant change over another active intervention is warranted.