The BEACON study: protocol for a cohort study as part of an evaluation of the effectiveness of smartphone-assisted problem-solving therapy in men who present with intentional self-harm to emergency departments in Ontario

Information and communication technology-based interventions for suicide prevention implemented in clinical settings: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

A large number of information and communication technology (ICT) based interventions exist for suicide prevention. However, not much is known about which of these ICTs are implemented in clinical settings and their implementation characteristics. In response, this scoping review aimed to systematically explore the breadth of evidence on ICT-based interventions for suicide prevention implemented in clinical settings and then to identify and characterize implementation barriers and facilitators, as well as evaluation outcomes, and measures.

METHODS

We conducted this review following the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology for scoping reviews. A search strategy was applied to the following six databases between August 17-20, 2021: MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Web of Science, and Library, Information Science and Technology Abstracts. We also supplemented our search with Google searches and hand-searching reference lists of relevant reviews. To be included in this review, studies must include ICT-based interventions for any spectrum of suicide-related thoughts and behaviours including non-suicidal self-injury. Additionally, these ICTs must be implemented in clinical settings, such as emergency department and in-patient units. We used the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) checklist to prepare this full report.

RESULTS

This review included a total of 75 citations, describing 70 studies and 66 ICT-based interventions for suicide prevention implemented in clinical settings. The majority of ICTs were computerized interventions and/or applications (n = 55). These ICTs were commonly used as indicated strategies (n = 49) targeting patients who were actively presenting with suicide risk. The three most common suicide prevention intervention categories identified were post-discharge follow-up (n = 27), screening and/or assessment (n = 22), and safety planning (n = 20). A paucity of reported information was identified related to implementation strategies, barriers and facilitators. The most reported implementation strategies included training, education, and collaborative initiatives. Barriers and facilitators of implementation included the need for resource supports, knowledge, skills, motivation as well as engagement with clinicians with research teams. Studies included outcomes at patient, clinician, and health system levels, and implementation outcomes included acceptability, feasibility, fidelity, and penetration.

CONCLUSION

This review presents several trends of the ICT-based interventions for suicide prevention implemented in clinical settings and identifies a need for future research to strengthen the evidence base for improving implementation. More effort is required to better understand and support the implementation and sustainability of ICTs in clinical settings. The findings can also serve as a future resource for researchers seeking to evaluate the impact and implementation of ICTs.

The BEACON study: an update to the protocol for a cohort study as part of an evaluation of the effectiveness of smartphone-assisted problem-solving therapy in men who present with intentional self-harm to emergency departments in Ontario

BACKGROUND

Men who present to the emergency department (ED) with self-harm are at high risk of dying by suicide, with 2.7% of men dying in the year following their presentation, more than double the rate for women (1.2%). Despite this, care received after an ED visit is highly variable and many are not assessed for psychological needs. Furthermore, the limited psychological care that is available is often not covered by provincial health insurance. Even when referrals for follow-up care are made, engagement rates are low. Previous recommendations to improve engagement include written discharge plans, caring contacts, and focused interventions targeting middle-aged men at elevated risk of dying by suicide. Blended care, the incorporation of technology into traditional care, has also been proposed as a method to increase engagement in and clinical benefits from psychotherapy. This project aims to determine whether the delivery of an evidence based treatment (problem-solving therapy (PST)) is enhanced by the addition of a custom smartphone application (BEACON) compared to usual care. Due to the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on site participation and the planned implementation, we have made several changes to the study design, primary outcome, and implementation.

METHOD

We originally proposed a cohort study nested within a larger cluster randomized trial wherein intervention sites would deliver the blended care, and control sites, whose personnel were not aware of their participation, would continue delivering usual care. The cohort study evaluated participant level outcomes as previously described by Hatcher et al. (2020). Due to pandemic-related constraints, our number of participating sites dropped to five potential sites which left the cohort study underpowered. As such, we changed the study design to a multi-site, individual randomized controlled trial (RCT) among the five remaining sites. Participants will be randomized to six sessions of therapy (PST) alone, or to the therapy plus BEACON, and followed up for 6 months. Our primary outcome was changed to evaluate feasibility and acceptability with the aim of designing a definitive RCT. Study implementation was reimagined to allow for completely virtual/online conduct to comply with local COVID-19 and institutional restrictions on in-person activities.

CONCLUSION

This updated protocol will provide strong results for the planning of a definitive RCT of the blended care intervention in the future, addressing areas of difficulty and concern prior to its implementation. We will evaluate the feasibility of the study intervention, assess recruitment and retention of participants, and address challenges with implementing the protocol. Lastly, we will evaluate the appropriateness of our primary outcome measure and accurately determine a sample size for a definitive RCT.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03473535 . Registered on March 22, 2018.

Enhancing COVID Rehabilitation with Technology (ECORT): protocol for an open-label, single-site randomized controlled trial evaluating the effectiveness of electronic case management for individuals with persistent COVID-19 symptoms

BACKGROUND

As of May 2022, Ontario has seen more than 1.3 million cases of COVID-19. While the majority of individuals will recover from infection within 4 weeks, a significant subset experience persistent and often debilitating symptoms, known as "post-COVID syndrome" or "Long COVID." Those with Long COVID experience a wide array of symptoms, with variable severity, including fatigue, cognitive impairment, and shortness of breath. Further, the prevalence and duration of Long COVID is not clear, nor is there evidence on the best course of rehabilitation for individuals to return to their desired level of function. Previous work with chronic conditions has suggested that the addition of electronic case management (ECM) may help to improve outcomes. These platforms provide enhanced connection with care providers, detailed symptom tracking and goal setting, and access to relevant resources. In this study, our primary aim is to determine if the addition of ECM with health coaching improves Long COVID outcomes at 3 months compared to health coaching alone.

METHODS

The trial is an open-label, single-site, randomized controlled trial of ECM with health coaching (ECM+) compared to health coaching alone (HC). Both groups will continue to receive usual care. Participants will be randomized equally to receive health coaching (± ECM) for a period of 8 weeks and a 12-week follow-up. Our primary outcome is the WHO Disability Assessment Scale (WHODAS), 36-item self-report total score. Participants will also complete measures of cognition, fatigue, breathlessness, and mental health. Participants and care providers will be asked to complete a brief qualitative interview at the end of the study to evaluate acceptability and implementation of the intervention.

DISCUSSION

There is currently little evidence about the optimal treatment of Long COVID patients or the use of digital health platforms in this population. The results of this trial could result in rapid, scalable, and personalized care for people with Long COVID which will decrease morbidity after an acute infection. Results from this study will also inform decision making in Long COVID and treatment guidelines at provincial and national levels.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05019963. Registered on 25 August 2021.