↓ Skip to main content

The survivability of dialectical behaviour therapy programmes: a mixed methods analysis of barriers and facilitators to implementation within UK healthcare settings

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Psychiatry, September 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (80th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (62nd percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
3 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
71 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The survivability of dialectical behaviour therapy programmes: a mixed methods analysis of barriers and facilitators to implementation within UK healthcare settings
Published in
BMC Psychiatry, September 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12888-018-1876-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Joanne C. King, Richard Hibbs, Christopher W. N. Saville, Michaela A. Swales

Abstract

Dialectical Behaviour Therapy (DBT) is an evidence-based intervention that has been included in the National Institute of Health and Care Excellence guidelines as a recommended treatment for Borderline Personality Disorder in the UK. However, implementing and sustaining evidence-based treatments in routine practice can be difficult to achieve. This study compared the survival of early and late adopters of DBT as well as teams trained via different training modes (on-site versus off-site), and explored factors that aided or hindered implementation of DBT into routine healthcare settings. A mixed-method approach was used. Kaplan-Meier survival analyses were conducted to quantify and compare survivability as a measure of sustainability between early and late implementers and those trained on- and off-site. An online questionnaire based on the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research was used to explore barriers and facilitators in implementation. A quantitative content analysis of survey responses was carried out. Early implementers were significantly less likely to survive than late implementers, although, the effect size was small. DBT teams trained off-site were significantly more likely to survive. The effect size for this difference was large.  An unequal amount of censored data between groups in both analyses means that findings should be considered tentative. Practitioner turnover and financing were the most frequently cited barriers to implementation. Individual characteristics of practitioners and quality of the evidence base were the most commonly reported facilitators to implementation. A number of common barriers and facilitators to successful implementation of DBT were found among DBT programmes. Location of DBT training may mediate programme survival.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 71 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 71 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 14 20%
Student > Doctoral Student 10 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 13%
Other 5 7%
Lecturer 3 4%
Other 9 13%
Unknown 21 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 27 38%
Social Sciences 6 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 7%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 4%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 1%
Other 5 7%
Unknown 24 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 08 October 2018.
All research outputs
#3,145,497
of 23,103,903 outputs
Outputs from BMC Psychiatry
#1,157
of 4,773 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#66,218
of 342,003 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Psychiatry
#38
of 104 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,103,903 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,773 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 342,003 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 104 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% of its contemporaries.