Feasibility evaluation of the HOLLY program: an ACT-based suicide prevention program for Christian faith-based organisations

Gatekeeper training for friends and family of individuals at risk of suicide: A systematic review

“…Only one of the two HOLLY program‐based studies formally evaluated outcomes postprogram completion and found significant results (Bazley & Pakenham, 2019); the other was a feasibility study designed to investigate the possible effectiveness of the program and to improve it for future use (Bazley & Pakenham, 2020). The majority of findings in the 2020 study were approaching statistical significance and were interpreted as trends, which included improvements in self‐efficacy, prevention behaviors, and stigma (Bazley & Pakenham, 2020).…”

“…Three studies involved the implementation of the QPR program in a single workshop session (Cross et al, 2011; Litteken & Sale, 2018; Tsong et al, 2019), one study used QPR as a basis for their training program (Teo et al, 2016) and another study involved a joint needs assessment and subsequent day‐long conference (Swanke & Dobie Buila, 2010). Two studies involved an Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT) based program, the Hope Often Looks Like You (HOLLY) program, which was delivered in a single‐day, through a 4 or 6‐h workshop (Bazley & Pakenham, 2019, 2020). Six programs were education‐based interventions (Baber & Bean, 2009; Pineda & Dadds, 2013; Schilling et al, 2016; Sun et al, 2013, 2014; Walker et al, 2009), ranging from a single, 3 h session for completion, to multiple, repeated sessions over a 3‐month period.…”

“…The training was delivered in a single‐day workshop lasting four or 6 h and split into two workshop modules. The first module aimed to increase participant knowledge about suicide, risk factors, warning signs, and prevention and response methods, and the second provided exercises for engaging with one's own emotions and cognitions toward caring for an individual who is at risk of suicide, involving a more practical, application‐based method (Bazley & Pakenham, 2019, 2020). The program was first implemented as a feasibility study in 13 FFSI (Bazley & Pakenham, 2020), and was again implemented as a pilot‐controlled study in 72 FFSI participants, split into an experimental (HOLLY) and control (waitlist) group (Bazley & Pakenham, 2019).…”

“…The majority of the reviewed studies either did not implement an attitude measure, or their findings fell short of statistical significance. One research group, who used standardized scales to evaluate stigma toward suicide, found no significant change, but they did find an increase in favorable attitudes towards helping individuals at risk of suicide, engaging in discussion about suicide, and providing support and compassion (Bazley & Pakenham, 2019, 2020). However, seven studies that used standardized or previously evaluated assessments found significant adaptive attitude improvements (less stigma, more openness to discussion, more compassion and understanding, etc.…”

“…The program was first implemented as a feasibility study in 13 FFSI(Bazley & Pakenham, 2020), and was again implemented as a pilotcontrolled study in 72 FFSI participants, split into an experimental (HOLLY) and control (waitlist) group(Bazley & Pakenham, 2019). Outcome measures, recorded both pre-and post-program implementation, included self-reported scales pertaining to suicide knowledge, suicide verbal responding, suicide stigma, and suicide preventative behaviors, and perceived self-efficacy in prevention(Bazley & Pakenham, 2019).3.5.2 | Program effects on outcomes of interestOnly one of the two HOLLY program-based studies formally evaluated outcomes postprogram completion and found significant results(Bazley & Pakenham, 2019); the other was a feasibility study designed to investigate the possible effectiveness of the program and to improve it for future use(Bazley & Pakenham, 2020). The majority of findings in the 2020 study were approaching statistical significance and were interpreted as trends, which included improvements in self-efficacy, prevention behaviors, and stigma(Bazley & Pakenham, 2020).In the follow-up to the feasibility study, changes to the program were made including a longer training period (6 h vs. 4 h) and refined content for the knowledge modules.…”