Your new experience awaits. Try the new design now and help us make it even better

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW article

Front. Psychiatry

Sec. Psychological Therapy and Psychosomatics

Volume 16 - 2025 | doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2025.1640341

This article is part of the Research TopicExpanding the Reach of Evidence-Based Psychological Interventions for Mental Health: Innovation, Access, and EquityView all 4 articles

Transdiagnostic Patient Experiences of Dialectical Behavioural Therapy: A Systematic Review and Metasynthesis

Provisionally accepted
Abigail  HallAbigail Hall1,2Lynsey  GreggLynsey Gregg1,2Brian  ' O'CeallaighBrian ' O'Ceallaigh2Anja  WittkowskiAnja Wittkowski1,2*
  • 1Division of Psychology and Mental Health, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, The University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
  • 2Greater Manchester Mental Health NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, United Kingdom

The final, formatted version of the article will be published soon.

Abstract Background: Dialectical Behaviour Therapy (DBT) combines cognitive-behavioural techniques and mindfulness practices to more skilfully regulate intense emotions and navigate interpersonal issues. While traditional DBT (skills group, individual therapy and crisis support) is well-studied in clinical populations, particularly for emotion regulation in conditions like borderline personality disorder or emotionally unstable personality disorder, recent research has explored alternative formats, such as skills-only groups. Although quantitative studies report positive outcomes (e.g., reduced self-injury and suicidality), less is known about patient experiences, which are crucial for developing effective interventions. This systematic review explored patient experiences of DBT skills groups across mental health conditions and age groups. Additionally, considering the processes patients perceive as contributing to therapeutic change and outcomes. Method: A systematic search was conducted across five databases following PRISMA guidelines, using search terms related to DBT and patient experience. Peer-reviewed papers employing qualitative or mixed-methods were included. Thematic synthesis was used for analysis. Results: Thirty-two papers were eligible for inclusion. Three main themes were generated: 1) the challenging road to DBT, 2) the difficult journey through DBT, and 3) patients' path for the future. Theme two contained three sub-themes (from theory to practice, transformative relationships - self and others, scaffolding and supporting change) and theme three included two sub-themes (therapeutic gains, future directions). Conclusions: Findings highlight the importance of pre-treatment and in-treatment experiences, relational factors like safety and validation and practical skill application. Key processes, including peer support and changed perspectives, shape therapeutic outcomes. Recommendations include flexible delivery formats and aligning patient preferences with intervention to maximise gains.

Keywords: qualitative research, Psychological Therapy, patient-centred care, literature review, thematic synthesis

Received: 03 Jun 2025; Accepted: 08 Sep 2025.

Copyright: © 2025 Hall, Gregg, O'Ceallaigh and Wittkowski. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

* Correspondence: Anja Wittkowski, Division of Psychology and Mental Health, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, The University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom

Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.