The CRP has been proposed as an alternative to TAU for the short-term management of suicidal patients and is now in widespread use, but has never been empirically tested. The CRP is purported to reduce suicide risk via unique mechanisms that directly suicide risk, notably suicidal ambivalence (i.e., the relative balance between the wish to live and the wish to die) and problem solving. Because suicidal ambivalence has gained support as an active mechanism for reducing suicide risk, the present study will also seek to augment this underlying mechanism by directly engaging the suicidal patient in a discussion about their reasons for living, thereby potentially increasing the potency of the CRP.
The present study therefore entails a component analysis of crisis interventions. As such, we anticipate ordered effects, whereby the S-CRP and E-CRP conditions will show significantly better outcomes than TAU, and E-CRP will demonstrate significantly better outcomes than the standard CRP condition.
