Table 1 Discussion papers
Reference | Country & service context | Key points/ recommendations made |
|---|---|---|
Chugani, 2015 [16] | America. College counselling centres | -Important to collect service-relevant outcome data as DBT is often adapted to fit the service -Important to adapt DBT so appropriate for the service -Can mitigate costs by hosting training or offering partial programmes |
Borroughs & Somerville, 2013 [15] | America. Assertive Community Treatment teams | -There may be resource and financial barriers, especially in the US healthcare system where services cannot recoup costs for training, consultation team meetings or data collection -It is important to determine if DBT ‘fits’ the service’s client group and theoretical stance -Recommended adapting DBT and offsetting costs by using existing infrastructure and demonstrating cost-effectiveness |
Koener, 2013 [18] | N/A | -DBT clinicians need a good conceptualisation of the therapy, including the treatment hierarchy and biosocial theory -Important that therapists are dialectical, cognitively flexible and validating -Recursive culture important; a community of therapists working with a community of patients, with everyone in the same boat -Services need to see patients as motivated to change and that services want to improve patient capability -Therapists should access the consultation team and mindfulness practice -Ensuring fidelity to manualised DBT ignores the contextual factors that moderate success |
McHugh & Barlow, 2010 [19] | Worldwide; Reviews and describes a range of implementation efforts | -In America, Behavior Tech acts as a champion for DBT --Ongoing outcome monitoring important to sustain fidelity and quality improvement -Implementation issues have informed DBT training. For instance, teams implement DBT before completing final training so that they can access consultation after their first attempts |
Swales, 2010a [11] | UK | -Larger DBT teams with less time will be slower at learning DBT than smaller teams who have greater allocated time -Important to gain staff commitment to implement DBT and to select staff with knowledge about DBT and implementation, who are willing to apply DBT skills themselves -Beneficial to recruit so that DBT teams encompass a range of skills -Important to have a DBT ‘champion’ and the team leader should be in a senior position -Consultation teams have an important role and the consultation agreement establishes the team climate -A minimum of two hours per work is necessary for supervision and consultation team meetings |
Swales, 2010b [12] | UK | -Description of an organisational pre-treatment approach where the DBT team leader or champion: -Identifies the appropriateness of DBT, weighing the evidence, policy aims and organisation suitability, culture and climate -Considers the organisations experience in implementing other new therapies -Resolves competing goals and if synthesis is impossible undertakes a pros and cons analysis -Forms an advisory or steering group to address factors likely to interfere with implementation |
Berzins & Trestman, 2004 [14] | America. Prison/correctional services. Non-systematic review and information collected from services | -All the programmes described had adapted DBT. There is currently no manual for DBT in correctional settings -Programmes were driven by clinical need (DBT had ‘goal fit’) -To implement and evaluate a proposed modified DBT programme for correctional settings, a coalition had been formed between the university, state and health departments |
Huffman et al., 2003 [17] | N/A | -Champion/consultant should be willing to model DBT skills -To accommodate time limitations, single components of DBT can be applied rather than the comprehensive intervention -Need to provide psychoeducation about BPD and validate staff experience of difficulties -Use contingency management; frame behaviour modification as the most effective approach |
Swenson et al., 2002 [21] | America. Public mental health authorities. Recommendations based on observations, a survey and literature review | -Barriers listed included therapist view of DBT suitability and staff turnover. Discussed therapist selection issues -Also discussed the barriers patients may face when starting DBT- e.g. it is a high time commitment and they might need to terminate current treatment contracts -Facilitators endorsed leadership from public mental health authorities, training, a positive attitude towards BPD and monitoring outcomes -Recommended forming coalitions between organisations providing DBT and those planning to implement DBT -Recommended providing training (psychoeducation) for public mental health authorities about DBT and BPD -Recommended highlighting to patients that DBT participation is voluntary |
Scheel, 2000 [20] | N/A. Overview and literature critique | -Suggested inpatient settings might transition most easily to DBT, as there is fit in terms of time availability and goals -Need access to training, supervision and consultation -Implementing DBT in a manner consistent with the evidence base requires a considerable staff team: resources may threaten viability -Outpatient DBT requires inter-agency support (a need for coalitions) |
Swenson, 2000 [22] | America | -Should use DBT skills to help implementation -The design of DBT contributes to its appeal to therapists. For instance, it integrates different orientations meaning it has a wide support base and therapists from various orientations automatically have ‘buy-in’ -DBT can be both pragmatic and very sophisticated |