Brief interventions and contacts after suicide attempt: A meta-analysis.

Following a suicide attempt, only a third of people receive outpatient treatment. This highlights the need to rethink our approach to treatment, to includethe consideration of low-threshold brief interventions and contacts. Therefore, in this study, we investigated the extent to which such brief interventions and contacts (BICs) are effective. PubMed, Cochrane, Embase, ProQuest, and PsycINFO were searched by independent researchers accordingto the PRISMA guidelines. This meta-analysis included randomized clinical trials (RCTs) that tested BIC in adults after a suicide attempt. It examined theeffectiveness of BIC on (1) re-attempts at follow-up, (2) self-harm at follow-up,(3) suicidal ideation at follow-up, and (4) linkage to mental health servicesat follow-up. The findings from 54 RCTs confirmed that BICs are effective: (1) Re-attempts at the follow-up phase were significantly reduced in the BICgroup compared with control (-0.35, 95% CI: -0.54, –0.15). (2) There was no difference between the groups in the recurrence of self-harm and (3) in theseverity of suicidal ideation at follow-up. (4) The linkage to mental health services at follow-up was significantly higher in the BIC group compared withcontrol (0.60, 95% CI: 0.05, 1.15). In this largest meta-analysis to date, there are clear implications for clinical practice: BICs, often consisting of only onesession, are effective in reducing the recurrence of suicide attempts and can be used to help people find a connection to the mental healthcare systemafter a suicide attempt. Thus, these interventions should be integrated into suicide prevention strategies.