Day hospital mentalization-based treatment v. specialist treatment as usual in patients with borderline personality disorder: randomized controlled trial

Impact of clinical severity on treatment response in a randomized controlled trial comparing day hospital and intensive outpatient mentalization-based treatment for borderline personality disorder

This study examined the impact of clinical severity on treatment outcome in two programs that differ markedly in treatment intensity: day hospital mentalization-based treatment (MBT-DH) and intensive outpatient mentalization-based treatment (MBT-IOP) for borderline personality disorder (BPD). A multicenter randomized controlled trial was conducted. Participants include the full intention-to-treat sample of the original trial of N = 114 randomized BPD patients (MBT-DH n = 70, MBT-IOP n = 44), who were assessed at baseline and subsequently every 6 up to 36 months after start of treatment. Outcomes were general symptom severity, borderline features, and interpersonal functioning. Clinical severity was examined in terms of severity of BPD, general symptom severity, comorbid symptom disorders, comorbid personality disorders, and cluster C personality features. None of the severity measures was related to treatment outcome or differentially predicted treatment outcome in MBT-DH and MBT-IOP, with the exception of a single moderating effect of co morbid symptom disorders on outcome in terms of BPD features, indicating less improvement in MBT-DH for patients with more symptom disorders. Overall, patients with varying levels of clinical severity benefited equally from MBT-DH and MBT-IOP, indicating that clinical severity may not be a useful criterion to differentiate in treatment intensity.

Efficacy of mentalization-based therapy in treating self-harm: A systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Mentalization-based therapy (MBT) and its adapted version for adolescents (MBT-A) are repeatedly highlighted as promising treatments for reducing self-harm, particularly in borderline personality disorder (BPD). Despite the availability of publications providing evidence of their efficacy in reducing self-harm, recent meta-analyses have yielded mixed results. To inform best-practice clinical decision-making, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis. We aimed to disentangle findings for both adolescents and adults on the efficacy of MBT(-A) in reducing self-harm (primary outcome) and symptoms of BPD and depression (secondary outcomes).

METHODS

Web of Science, Scopus, Embase, PubMed/Medline, and Cochrane Review Database were searched for eligible studies published until September 2022. In total, 14 studies were identified, comprising 612 participants from nine MBT studies (six pre-post, three RCTs) and five MBT-A studies (two pre-post, three RCTs). Aggregated effect sizes were estimated using random-effects models. Meta-regressions were conducted to assess the effect of moderator variables (treatment duration, drop-out rates, and age) on effect sizes.

RESULTS

Overall, both MBT and MBT-A demonstrated promising effects in reducing self-harm (g = -0.82, 95% CI -1.15 to -0.50), borderline personality disorder (g = -1.08, 95% CI -1.38 to -0.77), and depression (g = -1.1, 95% CI -1.52 to -0.68) symptoms. However, when compared to control interventions (TAU, SCM), MBT(-A) did not prove to be more efficacious, with the exception of MBT showing superior effects on BPD symptoms in adults (g = -0.56, 95% CI -0.88 to -0.24).

CONCLUSION

Although the pre-post evaluations seem promising, this analysis, including RCTs, showed no superiority of MBT(-A) to control conditions, so that prioritizing the application of MBT (-A) for the treatment of self-harm is not supported. Possible explanations and further implications are discussed.

Borderline personality disorder: a comprehensive review of diagnosis and clinical presentation, etiology, treatment, and current controversies

Borderline personality disorder (BPD) was introduced in the DSM-III in 1980. From the DSM-III to the DSM-5, no major changes have occurred in its defining criteria. The disorder is characterized by instability of self-image, interpersonal relationships and affects. Further symptoms include impulsivity, intense anger, feelings of emptiness, strong abandonment fears, suicidal or self-mutilation behavior, and transient stress-related paranoid ideation or severe dissociative symptoms. There is evidence that BPD can be reliably diagnosed and differentiated from other mental disorders by semi-structured interviews. The disorder is associated with considerable functional impairment, intensive treatment utilization, and high societal costs. The risk of self-mutilation and suicide is high. In the general adult population, the lifetime prevalence of BPD has been reported to be from 0.7 to 2.7%, while its prevalence is about 12% in outpatient and 22% in inpatient psychiatric services. BPD is significantly associated with other mental disorders, including depressive disorders, substance use disorders, post-traumatic stress disorder, attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, bipolar disorder, bulimia nervosa, and other personality disorders. There is convincing evidence to suggest that the interaction between genetic factors and adverse childhood experiences plays a central role in the etiology of BPD. In spite of considerable research, the neurobiological underpinnings of the disorder remain to be clarified. Psychotherapy is the treatment of choice for BPD. Various approaches have been empirically supported in randomized controlled trials, including dialectical behavior therapy, mentalization-based therapy, transference-focused therapy, and schema therapy. No approach has proved to be superior to others. Compared to treatment as usual, psychotherapy has proved to be more efficacious, with effect sizes between 0.50 and 0.65 with regard to core BPD symptom severity. However, almost half of the patients do not respond sufficiently to psychotherapy, and further research in this area is warranted. It is not clear whether some patients may benefit more from one psychotherapeutic approach than from others. No evidence is available consistently showing that any psychoactive medication is efficacious for the core features of BPD. For discrete and severe comorbid anxiety or depressive symptoms or psychotic-like features, pharmacotherapy may be useful. Early diagnosis and treatment of BPD can reduce individual suffering and societal costs. However, more high-quality studies are required, in both adolescents and adults. This review provides a comprehensive update of the BPD diagnosis and clinical characterization, risk factors, neurobiology, cognition, and management. It also discusses the current controversies concerning the disorder, and highlights the areas in which further research is needed.

Which psychotherapy is most effective and acceptable in the treatment of adults with a (sub)clinical borderline personality disorder? A systematic review and network meta-analysis

A broad range of psychotherapies have been proposed and evaluated in the treatment of borderline personality disorder (BPD), but the question which specific type of psychotherapy is most effective remains unanswered. In this study, two network meta-analyses (NMAs) were conducted investigating the comparative effectiveness of psychotherapies on (1) BPD severity and (2) suicidal behaviour (combined rate). Study drop-out was included as a secondary outcome. Six databases were searched until 21 January 2022, including RCTs on the efficacy of any psychotherapy in adults (⩾18 years) with a diagnosis of (sub)clinical BPD. Data were extracted using a predefined table format. PROSPERO ID:CRD42020175411. In our study, a total of 43 studies (N = 3273) were included. We found significant differences between several active comparisons in the treatment of (sub)clinical BPD, however, these findings were based on very few trials and should therefore be interpreted with caution. Some therapies were more efficacious compared to GT or TAU. Furthermore, some treatments more than halved the risk of attempted suicide and committed suicide (combined rate), reporting RRs around 0.5 or lower, however, these RRs were not statistically significantly better compared to other therapies or to TAU. Study drop-out significantly differed between some treatments. In conclusion, no single treatment seems to be the best choice to treat people with BPD compared to other treatments. Nevertheless, psychotherapies for BPD are perceived as first-line treatments, and should therefore be investigated further on their long-term effectiveness, preferably in head-to-head trials. DBT was the best connected treatment, providing solid evidence of its effectiveness.

Mentalization-oriented psychodynamic group therapy for patients with personality disorders: a naturalistic prospective cohort study

OBJECTIVES

Patients with personality disorders (PDs) are often treated with non-manualized psychodynamic group therapy (PDT) lasting for several years. Non-manualized PDT often combines a variety of therapeutic approaches from different PDT traditions, including mentalization-based therapy. Currently, little is known about the effect of this long-term, costly treatment. This study investigated the extent to which patients with different PDs benefit from mentalization-oriented PDT as it is implemented in clinical practice in terms of symptom severity, interpersonal problems, and general functioning.

METHODS

The design was a naturalistic, prospective cohort study. Seventy-five consecutive PD patients were assessed before treatment with the Symptom Checklist-90 Revised (SCL-90-R) as the primary outcome measure and the Inventory of Interpersonal Problems (IIP) and Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF) as secondary outcome measures. The sample was repeatedly assessed every 12 months for up to 36 months. Paired t-tests were applied to examine the effectiveness of the intervention.

RESULTS

Among completers (n = 42; 56%), improvement was observed on the SCL-90-R: Global Severity Index (mean change = -0.45 [95% CI = -0.72, -0.19]; Cohen's d = -0.55), Positive Symptom Distress Index (-0.40 [-0.63, -0.17]; -0.56); Positive Symptoms Total (-10.70 [-17.31, -4.09]; -0.52). Secondary outcomes also improved: IIP-total (mean change = -0.50 [95%CI = -0.74, -0.25]; Cohen's d = -0.66); GAF-Functioning (8.79 [6.32, 11.27]; 1.15); and GAF-Symptoms (10.67 [8.09, 13.25]; 1.34).

CONCLUSIONS

Completers improved on symptom severity, interpersonal problems, and general functioning, with within-group effect sizes ranging from medium to large. Approximately half the sample dropped out, suggesting that mentalization-oriented PDT spanning several years may be unrealistic for many patients with PD. Significant outcomesThere are no clear guidelines for psychological interventions targeting personality disorders (PDs), and currently eclectic and non-manualized psychodynamic approaches lasting for up to 3 years are prevailing in some clinical practices.Although this treatment approach may have an effect on compliant patients, the high drop-out rate indicates that it may not be suitable for a large proportion of PD patients since it requires long-term commitment. Furthermore, it is difficult to identify the content of the non-manualized psychodynamic therapy and what helps the patients.More specific clinical guidelines emphasizing the application of evidence-based treatments or at least manualized treatments are warranted for the treatment of emotionally unstable PDs and other PDs. LimitationsThe naturalistic study design, without any control group, limits conclusions about mechanisms of action of the intervention.Since the intervention was not manualized, it is unknown exactly which treatment was actually administered, which reduces external validity.The outcomes are based on completer data of a relatively small sample size with high drop-out rate.

The Effectiveness of Day Hospitals in the Personal Recovery of Mental Disorder Patients during the COVID-19 Pandemic

BACKGROUND

In recent years, a new recovery model has gained ground in which recovery is understood as a process of change where individuals are able to improve their health and wellbeing, lead self-sufficient lives and strive to achieve their maximum potential (personal recovery). Despite the existence of data regarding the effectiveness of mental health day hospitals (MHDHs) in reducing relapses in terms of hospital admissions and emergencies, no studies have to date assessed how this change affected the new personal recovery model.

OBJECTIVES

To verify the effectiveness of MHDHs in improving personal recovery processes among people with mental disorders (MDs).

METHODS

A prospective cohort study. A group of patients receiving follow-up at MHDHs was compared with another group of patients receiving follow-up in other therapeutic units over a period of three months.

RESULTS

Patient recovery at the MHDHs, assessed using the Individual Recovery Outcomes Counter (I.ROC), was found to be significantly better than that of patients attended in other units.

CONCLUSIONS

MHDHs can contribute to the recovery of people with MDs. This is particularly important at a time when some patients may have experienced impediments to their recovery processes due to the pandemic.

Effectiveness of outpatient and community treatments for people with a diagnosis of 'personality disorder': systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Quality of care and access to effective interventions have been widely criticised as limited for people diagnosed with 'personality disorder' or who have comparable needs (described in some recent papers as "Complex Emotional Needs" (CEN). It is important to identify effective interventions and the optimal context and mode of delivery for people with CEN. We aimed to investigate the effectiveness of psychosocial interventions delivered in community and outpatient settings in treating symptoms associated with 'personality disorder', and the moderating effects of treatment-related variables.

METHODS

We systematically searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, HMIC, ASSIA for articles published in English, from inception to November 23, 2020. We included randomized controlled trials examining interventions provided in community or outpatient settings for CEN. The primary outcome was 'personality disorder' symptoms, while secondary outcomes included anxiety symptoms, depressive symptoms, and global psychiatric symptoms. Random-effects meta-analysis was conducted for each outcome, and meta-regression analysis was performed to assess the moderating effects of treatment characteristics. The quality of the studies and the degree of publication bias was assessed.

RESULTS

We included 54 trials (n = 3716 participants) in the meta-analysis. We found a large effect size (g = 0.78, 95% CI: 0.56 to 1.01, p < 0.0001) favoring interventions for 'borderline personality disorder' (BPD) symptoms over Treatment as Usual or Waitlist (TAU/WL), and the efficacy was maintained at follow-up (g = 1.01, 95% CI: 0.37 to 1.65, p = 0.002). Interventions effectively reduced anxiety symptoms (g = 0.58, 95% CI: 0.21 to 0.95, p = 0.002), depressive symptoms (g = 0.57, 95% CI: 0.32 to 0.83, p < 0.0001), and global psychiatric symptoms (g = 0.50, 95% CI: 0.35 to 0.66, p < 0.0001) compared to TAU/WL. The intervention types were equally effective in treating all symptom categories assessed. Treatment duration and treatment intensity did not moderate the effectiveness of the interventions for any outcome.

CONCLUSIONS

People with a 'personality disorder' diagnosis benefited from psychological and psychosocial interventions delivered in community or outpatient settings, with all therapeutic approaches showing similar effectiveness. Mental health services should provide people with CEN with specialised treatments in accordance with the availability and the patients' preferences.

Perspectives on Dialectical Behavior Therapy and Mentalization-Based Therapy for Borderline Personality Disorder: Same, Different, Complementary?

Current evidence suggests that individuals with borderline personality disorder (BPD) are likely to benefit from specialized, or BPD-specific, treatments. Dialectical behavior therapy (DBT) and mentalization-based treatment (MBT) are currently the most intensively researched BPD treatments. Reviewing the current research, this paper highlights similarities and differences between the two treatments, and discusses possible ways they could complement each other. As the effectiveness of specialized treatments for BPD in general has been determined with some certainty, research now tends towards individualized approaches, identifying predictors of optimal treatment response. However, it is still to be settled who might profit from a combination of or sequential treatment with DBT and MBT.

Current state of the evidence on community treatments for people with complex emotional needs: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

Improving the quality of care in community settings for people with 'Complex Emotional Needs' (CEN-our preferred working term for services for people with a "personality disorder" diagnosis or comparable needs) is recognised internationally as a priority. Plans to improve care should be rooted as far as possible in evidence. We aimed to take stock of the current state of such evidence, and identify significant gaps through a scoping review of published investigations of outcomes of community-based psychosocial interventions designed for CEN.

METHODS

We conducted a scoping review with systematic searches. We searched six bibliographic databases, including forward and backward citation searching, and reference searching of relevant systematic reviews. We included studies using quantitative methods to test for effects on any clinical, social, and functioning outcomes from community-based interventions for people with CEN. The final search was conducted in November 2020.

RESULTS

We included 226 papers in all (210 studies). Little relevant literature was published before 2000. Since then, publications per year and sample sizes have gradually increased, but most studies are relatively small, including many pilot or uncontrolled studies. Most studies focus on symptom and self-harm outcomes of various forms of specialist psychotherapy: most result in outcomes better than from inactive controls and similar to other specialist psychotherapies. We found large evidence gaps. Adaptation and testing of therapies for significant groups (e.g. people with comorbid psychosis, bipolar disorder, post-traumatic stress disorder, or substance misuse; older and younger groups; parents) have for the most part only reached a feasibility testing stage. We found little evidence regarding interventions to improve social aspects of people's lives, peer support, or ways of designing effective services.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with other longer term mental health problems that significantly impair functioning, the evidence base on how to provide high quality care for people with CEN is very limited. There is good evidence that people with CEN can be helped when specialist therapies are available and when they are able to engage with them. However, a much more methodologically robust and substantial literature addressing a much wider range of research questions is urgently needed to optimise treatment and support across this group.

Psychotherapies for borderline personality disorder: a focused systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

A recently updated Cochrane review supports the efficacy of psychotherapy for borderline personality disorder (BPD).

AIMS

To evaluate the effects of standalone and add-on psychotherapeutic treatments more concisely.

METHOD

We applied the same methods as the 2020 Cochrane review, but focused on adult samples and comparisons of active treatments and unspecific control conditions. Standalone treatments (i.e. necessarily including individual psychotherapy as either the sole or one of several treatment components) and add-on interventions (i.e. complementing any ongoing individual BPD treatment) were analysed separately. Primary outcomes were BPD severity, self-harm, suicide-related outcomes and psychosocial functioning. Secondary outcomes were remaining BPD diagnostic criteria, depression and attrition.

RESULTS

Thirty-one randomised controlled trials totalling 1870 participants were identified. Among standalone treatments, statistically significant effects of low overall certainty were observed for dialectical behaviour therapy (self-harm: standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.54, P = 0.006; psychosocial functioning: SMD -0.51, P = 0.01) and mentalisation-based treatment (self-harm: risk ratio 0.51, P < 0.0007; suicide-related outcomes: risk ratio 0.10, P < 0.0001). For adjunctive interventions, moderate-quality evidence of beneficial effects was observed for DBT skills training (BPD severity: SMD -0.66, P = 0.002; psychosocial functioning: SMD -0.45, P = 0.002), and statistically significant low-certainty evidence was observed for the emotion regulation group (BPD severity: mean difference -8.49, P < 0.00001), manual-assisted cognitive therapy (self-harm: mean difference -3.03, P = 0.03; suicide-related outcomes: SMD -0.96, P = 0.005) and the systems training for emotional predictability and problem-solving (BPD severity: SMD -0.48, P = 0.002).

CONCLUSIONS

There is reasonable evidence to conclude that psychotherapeutic interventions are helpful for individuals with BPD. Replication studies are needed to enhance the certainty of findings.

Telehealth Treatment of Patients With Borderline Personality Disorder in a Partial Hospital Setting During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Comparative Safety, Patient Satisfaction, and Effectiveness of In-Person Treatment

There are no studies of the safety and effectiveness of telehealth psychiatric treatment of partial hospital level of care, in general, and for borderline personality disorder (BPD) in particular. In the present report from the Rhode Island Methods to Improve Diagnostic Assessment and Services (MIDAS) project, the authors compared the effectiveness of their partial hospital treatment program in treating patients with BPD. For both the in-person and telehealth partial hospital level of care, patients with BPD were highly satisfied with treatment and reported a significant reduction in symptoms from admission to discharge. Both groups reported a significant improvement in functioning, coping ability, positive mental health, and general well-being. A large effect size of treatment was found in both treatment groups. No patients attempted suicide. Telehealth partial hospital treatment was as effective as in-person treatment in terms of patient satisfaction, symptom reduction, and improved functioning and well-being for patients with BPD.

Iconic Therapy for the reduction of borderline personality disorder symptoms among suicidal youth: a preliminary study

BACKGROUND

Iconic therapy (IT) is a new therapy that uses images to teach skills with the aim of improving the symptoms of borderline personality disorder. Preliminary results are promising, and there is indication that IT may be effective. The purpose of this preliminary study was to test the effectiveness of IT compared to a psychological supportive intervention (SI).

METHODS

The study was carried out at the University Regional Hospital of Malaga. Young patients (N = 40; 15-30 years) with suicidal or parasuicidal behavior and borderline personality traits were randomized into IT (N = 20) or SI (N = 20). The main outcome variable was a change in the symptoms of borderline personality disorder (BSL-23) at the end of treatment. The secondary outcome variables were suicidal ideation and behavior, self-harm, the need for medication, the number of visits to mental health professionals, maladaptive behavior, satisfaction with therapy and perceived improvement, both at the end of the intensive treatment and at the 12-month follow-up.

RESULTS

As expected, the two therapies produced a reduction in BPD symptoms at 10 weeks post-treatment and at the 12-month follow-up. Contrary to expectation, there were no statistically significant differences in the effectiveness of the two therapies (p > 0.05). However, at the 12-month follow-up, the effect sizes for the difference between the effectiveness of the two therapy groups on BSL-23 scores (d = 0.33) and on maladjustment to daily life (d = 0.39) was found to exceed the commonly used convention for a small effect (d = 0.20). Besides, participants in the IT group showed greater satisfaction with therapy than those who received SI. The mean difference between groups was statistically significant after the 10-week treatment period (p < .01), with a large effect size (d = 1.11). Nevertheless, this difference was not maintained at the 12-month follow-up (p > .05), although the effect size for this analysis (d = 0.34) was found to exceed a small effect.

CONCLUSIONS

This preliminary study did not find a statistically significant difference in the effectiveness of the two therapies, probably due to the small sample of participants, but there are some indicators (effect sizes) suggesting that perhaps IT may be superior for reducing BPD symptoms and maladjustment in daily life. Future studies with larger samples and comparisons with established treatments for borderline personality disorder are necessary to confirm that IT effects are significant and persistent in the long term.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03011190 . First posted 05/01/2017. Last update posted 15/05/2018.

Day hospital versus intensive outpatient mentalization-based treatment: 3-year follow-up of patients treated for borderline personality disorder in a multicentre randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Two types of mentalization-based treatment (MBT), day hospital MBT (MBT-DH) and intensive outpatient MBT (MBT-IOP), have been shown to be effective in treating patients with borderline personality disorder (BPD). This study evaluated trajectories of change in a multi-site trial of MBT-DH and MBT-IOP at 36 months after the start of treatment.

METHODS

All 114 patients (MBT-DH n = 70, MBT-IOP n = 44) from the original multicentre trial were assessed at 24, 30 and 36 months after the start of treatment. The primary outcome was symptom severity measured with the Brief Symptom Inventory. Secondary outcome measures included borderline symptomatology, personality and interpersonal functioning, quality of life and self-harm. Data were analysed using multilevel modelling and the intention-to-treat principle.

RESULTS

Patients in both MBT-DH and MBT-IOP maintained the substantial improvements made during the intensive treatment phase and showed further gains during follow-up. Across both conditions, 83% of patients improved in terms of symptom severity, and 97% improved on borderline symptomatology. No significant differences were found between MBT-DH and MBT-IOP at 36 months after the start of treatment. However, trajectories of change were different. Whereas patients in MBT-DH showed greater improvement during the intensive treatment phase, patients in MBT-IOP showed greater continuing improvement during follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients in both conditions showed similar large improvements over the course of 36 months, despite large differences in treatment intensity. MBT-DH and MBT-IOP were associated with different trajectories of change. Cost-effectiveness considerations and predictors of differential treatment outcome may further inform optimal treatment selection.

Mentalization-Based Treatment in a Naturalistic Setting in Ireland: A Cohort Study

OBJECTIVE

This study evaluated the real-world effectiveness of mentalization-based treatment by assessing the clinical status of patients before and after completing the treatment program, which was nested within a general adult community mental health service, and by comparing these patients with a treatment-as-usual group.

METHODS

In this retrospective longitudinal naturalistic study, patients with a primary diagnosis of borderline personality disorder received either mentalization-based treatment (N=34) or treatment as usual (N=51). Data were collected from clinical charts and hospital databases. Presentations to the emergency department (ED), psychiatric and medical hospitalizations, and rates of loss to follow-up were analyzed for both groups.

RESULTS

In the 2 years after a course of mentalization-based treatment, significant reductions were noted in psychiatric hospitalizations (p=0.018). Compared with the treatment-as-usual group, the intervention group had significant reductions in ED presentations (p=0.004) and medical admissions (p=0.040), when the analysis controlled for age and gender. At study endpoint, the proportion of patients lost to follow-up in the treatment-as-usual group was larger (χ²=7.59, df=1, p=0.006), with three deaths in the treatment-as-usual group and none in the mentalization-based treatment group.

CONCLUSIONS

Mentalization-based treatment embedded within a community mental health team may have a positive effect, with significant improvements in unscheduled service use and notable reductions in ED presentations, hospitalizations, loss to follow-up, and mortality. There may be value in building on this study with more prospective, systematic research and patient-reported outcomes to assess the practical significance of this intervention in general psychiatric settings.

Effects of Arts and Psychomotor Therapies in Personality Disorders. Developing a Treatment Guideline Based on a Systematic Review Using GRADE

What is the effect of arts and psychomotor therapies, using art, dance, drama, music, movement and body awareness, in personality disorder treatment? This was explored by developing a treatment guideline based on a systematic review using the GRADE system within the context of the Dutch national multidisciplinary guidelines for treatment of personality disorders. Conclusions were formulated by a work group and based on the scientific substantiation and were integrated with other indications in the functioning of arts and psychomotor therapies in personality disorders. The first general search yielded 1,900 records which was brought back to 53 full-texts. Ultimately, 1 RCT and 2 pilot studies were included. Recommendations for treatment are that arts and psychomotor therapies are included in treatment, independent of age, sex or specific diagnostic characteristics. Arts and psychomotor therapies can be considered for purposes of coming into emotional contact with difficult aspects of patients and their experiences, to work on goals such as regulation of emotions, stress, identity/self-image, self-expression, mood/anxiety, relaxation, changing patterns and social functioning. Enlisting arts and psychomotor therapies for patients with a personality disorder is recommended because they value these therapies and perceive these to be effective. It could be considered to ask arts and psychomotor therapies to provide a contribution to the diagnostic process, to the problem analysis via observation and to determining treatment indication and treatment goals. More research is needed.

The association between reflective function and global functionality in patients with borderline personality disorder

OBJECTIVE

To examine the association between reflective function and global functionality in borderline personality disorder (BPD) patients, controlling for symptomatology and defensive style.

METHOD

Thirty-nine female inpatients were evaluated employing a sociodemographic questionnaire, the Structured Clinical Interview for Personality Disorders-II (SCID-II), the Self-Reporting Questionnaire (SRQ-20), the Reflective Functioning Questionnaire (RFQ), the Defence Style Questionnaire-40 (DSQ-40) and the Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF).

RESULTS

Functionality was inversely associated with the reflective function uncertainty score (-.458; p < .01) and neurotic defences (-.335; p < .05). Symptom severity (SRQ-20) was associated with the use of immature defences (-.445; p < .01). The association between functionality and the reflective function uncertainty score remained significant, even when controlled for symptoms and defensive style (p = .002).

CONCLUSION

The ability to mentalise seems to play a central and somehow independent role in BPD psychopathology.

Mentalization-based treatment in groups for adolescents with Borderline Personality Disorder: 3- and 12-month follow-up of a randomized controlled trial

Mentalization-based treatment in groups (MBT-G) has never been tested in adolescents with Borderline Personality Disorder (BPD) in a randomized controlled trial. The current study aimed to test the long-term effectiveness of MBT-G in an adolescent sample with BPD or BPD features (≥ 4 DSM-5 BPD criteria). Hundred and eleven patients with BPD (n = 106) or BPD features (n = 5) were randomized to either (1) a 1-year modified MBT-G program comprising three MBT introductory sessions, five individual case formulation sessions, 37 weekly MBT group sessions, and six MBT-Parent sessions, or (2) treatment as usual (TAU), defined as at least 12 individual monthly treatment sessions with follow-up assessments at 3 and 12 months post treatment. The primary outcome was the score on the Borderline Personality Features Scale for Children (BPFS-C), and secondary outcomes included clinician-rated BPD symptoms and global level of functioning as well as self-reported self-harm, depression, externalizing and internalizing symptoms, and caregiver reports. There were no statistically significant differences between MBT-G and TAU on the primary outcome measure or any of the secondary outcomes. Both groups showed improvement on the majority of clinical and social outcomes at both follow-up points, although remission rates were modest with just 35% in MBT-G and 39% in TAU 2 years after inclusion into the study. MBT-G was not superior to TAU in improving borderline features in adolescents. Although improvement was observed equally in both interventions over time, the patients continued to exhibit prominent BPD features, general psychopathology and decreased functioning in the follow-up period, which points to a need for more research and better understanding of effective components in early intervention programs. The ClinicalTrials.gov identifier is NCT02068326.

Effect of Psychotherapy for Borderline Personality Disorder on Quality of Life: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Whereas several meta-analyses have shown that psychotherapy is effective for reducing borderline personality disorder (BPD) pathology, the overall impact of psychotherapy for BPD on quality of life (QoL) remains as yet unclear. Because impaired QoL is associated with poor long-term outcomes after therapy for BPD, this seems a timely and relevant issue. The authors conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials of psychotherapies for adults diagnosed with BPD that reported results of QoL at posttreatment. Fourteen trials were included (1,370 individuals with BPD). Psychotherapies for BPD relative to control conditions showed significant effect sizes for QoL (Cohen's d = 0.31; 95% CI [0.18, 0.44]), and for BPD pathology (d = 0.43; 95% CI [0.23, 0.64]). The effect on QoL was not significantly moderated by the effect on BPD pathology. Psychotherapies for BPD have a positive effect on QoL of patients with BPD. However, more studies are needed to examine the impact of psychotherapy on QoL and long-term outcome, including recovery.

Psychological therapies for people with borderline personality disorder

BACKGROUND

Over the decades, a variety of psychological interventions for borderline personality disorder (BPD) have been developed. This review updates and replaces an earlier review (Stoffers-Winterling 2012).

OBJECTIVES

To assess the beneficial and harmful effects of psychological therapies for people with BPD.

SEARCH METHODS

In March 2019, we searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, 14 other databases and four trials registers. We contacted researchers working in the field to ask for additional data from published and unpublished trials, and handsearched relevant journals. We did not restrict the search by year of publication, language or type of publication.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials comparing different psychotherapeutic interventions with treatment-as-usual (TAU; which included various kinds of psychotherapy), waiting list, no treatment or active treatments in samples of all ages, in any setting, with a formal diagnosis of BPD. The primary outcomes were BPD symptom severity, self-harm, suicide-related outcomes, and psychosocial functioning. There were 11 secondary outcomes, including individual BPD symptoms, as well as attrition and adverse effects.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

At least two review authors independently selected trials, extracted data, assessed risk of bias using Cochrane's 'Risk of bias' tool and assessed the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach. We performed data analysis using Review Manager 5 and quantified the statistical reliability of the data using Trial Sequential Analysis.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 75 randomised controlled trials (4507 participants), predominantly involving females with mean ages ranging from 14.8 to 45.7 years. More than 16 different kinds of psychotherapy were included, mostly dialectical behaviour therapy (DBT) and mentalisation-based treatment (MBT). The comparator interventions included treatment-as-usual (TAU), waiting list, and other active treatments. Treatment duration ranged from one to 36 months. Psychotherapy versus TAU Psychotherapy reduced BPD symptom severity, compared to TAU; standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.52, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.70 to -0.33; 22 trials, 1244 participants; moderate-quality evidence. This corresponds to a mean difference (MD) of -3.6 (95% CI -4.4 to -2.08) on the Zanarini Rating Scale for BPD (range 0 to 36), a clinically relevant reduction in BPD symptom severity (minimal clinical relevant difference (MIREDIF) on this scale is -3.0 points). Psychotherapy may be more effective at reducing self-harm compared to TAU (SMD -0.32, 95% CI -0.49 to -0.14; 13 trials, 616 participants; low-quality evidence), corresponding to a MD of -0.82 (95% CI -1.25 to 0.35) on the Deliberate Self-Harm Inventory Scale (range 0 to 34). The MIREDIF of -1.25 points was not reached. Suicide-related outcomes improved compared to TAU (SMD -0.34, 95% CI -0.57 to -0.11; 13 trials, 666 participants; low-quality evidence), corresponding to a MD of -0.11 (95% CI -0.19 to -0.034) on the Suicidal Attempt Self Injury Interview. The MIREDIF of -0.17 points was not reached. Compared to TAU, psychotherapy may result in an improvement in psychosocial functioning (SMD -0.45, 95% CI -0.68 to -0.22; 22 trials, 1314 participants; low-quality evidence), corresponding to a MD of -2.8 (95% CI -4.25 to -1.38), on the Global Assessment of Functioning Scale (range 0 to 100). The MIREDIF of -4.0 points was not reached. Our additional Trial Sequential Analysis on all primary outcomes reaching significance found that the required information size was reached in all cases. A subgroup analysis comparing the different types of psychotherapy compared to TAU showed no clear evidence of a difference for BPD severity and psychosocial functioning. Psychotherapy may reduce depressive symptoms compared to TAU but the evidence is very uncertain (SMD -0.39, 95% CI -0.61 to -0.17; 22 trials, 1568 participants; very low-quality evidence), corresponding to a MD of -2.45 points on the Hamilton Depression Scale (range 0 to 50). The MIREDIF of -3.0 points was not reached. BPD-specific psychotherapy did not reduce attrition compared with TAU. Adverse effects were unclear due to too few data. Psychotherapy versus waiting list or no treatment Greater improvements in BPD symptom severity (SMD -0.49, 95% CI -0.93 to -0.05; 3 trials, 161 participants), psychosocial functioning (SMD -0.56, 95% CI -1.01 to -0.11; 5 trials, 219 participants), and depression (SMD -1.28, 95% CI -2.21 to -0.34, 6 trials, 239 participants) were observed in participants receiving psychotherapy versus waiting list or no treatment (all low-quality evidence). No evidence of a difference was found for self-harm and suicide-related outcomes. Individual treatment approaches DBT and MBT have the highest numbers of primary trials, with DBT as subject of one-third of all included trials, followed by MBT with seven RCTs. Compared to TAU, DBT was more effective at reducing BPD severity (SMD -0.60, 95% CI -1.05 to -0.14; 3 trials, 149 participants), self-harm (SMD -0.28, 95% CI -0.48 to -0.07; 7 trials, 376 participants) and improving psychosocial functioning (SMD -0.36, 95% CI -0.69 to -0.03; 6 trials, 225 participants). MBT appears to be more effective than TAU at reducing self-harm (RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.49 to 0.80; 3 trials, 252 participants), suicidality (RR 0.10, 95% CI 0.04, 0.30, 3 trials, 218 participants) and depression (SMD -0.58, 95% CI -1.22 to 0.05, 4 trials, 333 participants). All findings are based on low-quality evidence. For secondary outcomes see review text.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Our assessments showed beneficial effects on all primary outcomes in favour of BPD-tailored psychotherapy compared with TAU. However, only the outcome of BPD severity reached the MIREDIF-defined cut-off for a clinically meaningful improvement. Subgroup analyses found no evidence of a difference in effect estimates between the different types of therapies (compared to TAU) . The pooled analysis of psychotherapy versus waiting list or no treatment found significant improvement on BPD severity, psychosocial functioning and depression at end of treatment, but these findings were based on low-quality evidence, and the true magnitude of these effects is uncertain. No clear evidence of difference was found for self-harm and suicide-related outcomes. However, compared to TAU, we observed effects in favour of DBT for BPD severity, self-harm and psychosocial functioning and, for MBT, on self-harm and suicidality at end of treatment, but these were all based on low-quality evidence. Therefore, we are unsure whether these effects would alter with the addition of more data.

Mentalization-based treatment and its evidence-base status: A systematic literature review

PURPOSE

This study reviewed the evidence-base status of mentalization-based treatment (MBT), its quality, strengths, and limitations. The aim was to pave the way for further MBT research.

METHOD

An electronic database and reference lists search identified MBT outcome papers, and these were systematically reviewed. The quality of the studies and the risk of bias were determined using two validated checklist tools.

RESULTS

Twenty-three studies were included in the review. This included nine randomized controlled trials, seven uncontrolled pre- and post-effectiveness studies, three retrospective cohort studies, two uncontrolled randomized trials, and two case studies. The methodological quality of almost half of the papers was assessed as fair (43%), followed by good (34%), poor (17%), and excellent (4%) ratings. Nevertheless, the review identified risk of confounding bias across the majority of studies (60%) and fidelity to treatment was poorly reported in almost half of the studies (47%). Most of the studies focused on borderline personality disorder (BPD), showing positive clinical outcomes for this population but the evidence-base for other presentations was still developing. The treatment of adolescents who self-harm and at-risk mothers in substance abuse treatment showed particularly promising results, as these are client groups that have previously shown limited positive response to psychological interventions.

CONCLUSIONS

Mentalization-based treatment is a potentially effective method across a wide range of clinical presentations but further research should focus on increasing the quality and the quantity of the MBT evidence outside the treatment of BPD.

PRACTITIONER POINTS

MBT can be a particularly effective intervention for the treatment of adults with a diagnosis of BPD and of adolescents who self-harm and mothers enrolled in substance abuse treatments. MBT can be an effective intervention for depression and eating disorders but the evidence is currently limited. Professionals supporting mothers of children at risk may benefit from receiving training in the principles of MBT.

Differences between psychiatric disorders in the clinical and functional effectiveness of an acute psychiatric day hospital, for acutely ill psychiatric patients

INTRODUCTION

Intensive treatment in acute day-care psychiatric units may represent an efficient alternative to inpatient care. However, there is evidence suggesting that this clinical resource may not be equally effective for every psychiatric disorder. The primary aim of this study was to explore differences between main psychiatric diagnostic groups, in the effectiveness of an acute partial hospitalization program. And, to identify predictors of treatment response.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The study was conducted at an acute psychiatric day hospital. Clinical severity was assessed using BPRS, CGI, and the HoNOS scales. Main socio-demographic variables were also recorded. Patients were clustered into 4wide diagnostic groups (i.e.: non-affective psychosis; bipolar; depressive; and personality disorders) to facilitate statistical analyses.

RESULTS

A total of 331 participants were recruited, 115 of whom (34.7%) were diagnosed with non-affective psychosis, 97 (28.3%) with bipolar disorder, 92 (27.8%) with affective disorder, and 27 (8.2%) with personality disorder. Patients with a diagnosis of bipolar disorder showed greater improvement in BPRS (F=5.30; P=0.001) and CGI (F=8.78; P<0.001) than those suffering from psychosis or depressive disorder. Longer length of stay in the day-hospital, and greater baseline BPRS severity, were identified as predictors of good clinical response. Thirty-day readmission rate was 3%; at long-term (6 months after discharge) only 11.8% (N=39) of patients were re-admitted to a psychiatric hospitalization unit, and no differences were observed between diagnostic groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Intensive care in an acute psychiatric day hospital is feasible and effective for patients suffering from an acute mental disorder. However, this effectiveness differs between diagnostic groups.

Running a mentalization-based treatment (MBT) programme within a public community adult mental health service setting: a feasibility study

OBJECTIVES

This article aimed to address the feasibility of mentalization-based treatment (MBT) for patients with personality disorder in a non-specialist setting. The development and implementation of an MBT Programme is described.

METHODS

A multidisciplinary Consult Group met to plan the implementation of the programme. Participants attended a psychoeducation group (MBT Introductory Group), then weekly individual and group therapy. Fourteen participants started the full programme with eight completing at least 9 months, complete data are available for five participants who completed 27 months (first cohort) and 21 months (second cohort). Data include quantitative measures and qualitative questionnaires/interviews. All had a diagnosis of personality dysfunction with co-morbid disorder including anxiety/depressive disorder, post-traumatic stress disorder and eating disorder.

RESULTS

Data on five participants revealed reductions in global level of distress, improvements in psychological well-being, less interpersonal difficulties and better work and social functioning. Qualitative data from feedback questionnaires (n = 18) and in-depth interview (n = 2) are discussed under the themes of mentalizing, treatment feedback/outcomes and group factors. Therapist reflections on the process identify the challenges involved in implementing a specialist psychotherapy programme within a general service and learning points from this are discussed.

CONCLUSIONS

MBT is an acceptable treatment for patients with personality dysfunction. Prior to the implementation of a programme, factors at the therapist, team and organizational level, as well as the wider context, need to be examined. This is to ensure that conditions are in place for proper adherence to the model to achieve the positive outcomes demonstrated in the RCT studies.

Effectiveness of a 6-Week Day Hospital Treatment for Personality Disorders: Data From a Naturalistic Study

OBJECTIVE

To report on the effectiveness of a time-limited day-hospital crisis treatment for personality disorders (PDs) in a naturalistic setting.

METHOD

Archival data from 260 patients diagnosed with PDs (202 female, 58 male) who completed a 6-week day-hospital treatment program between 2012 and 2015 were analyzed. Treatment was available upon referral by psychiatrists at local emergency rooms and short-term hospitalization units. Pre-post change was assessed using the Outcome Questionnaire (OQ-45.2).

RESULTS

Patients significantly improved during treatment on the total OQ-45.2 scale and its 3 subscales. Pre-post changes yielded large effect sizes for the total OQ-45.2 scale and the Symptom Distress subscale, and moderate effect sizes for the Interpersonal Relations and Social Role subscales. Reliable change was observed for 55% of patients for the total scale. Younger patients (18 to 24 y of age) showed larger improvements on social role satisfaction than patients over the age of 30. Overall improvement was larger for patients engaged in social participation at the beginning of treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

This study conducted in a naturalistic setting suggests that a time-limited, 6-week day-hospital treatment program tailored to patients wiith PDs may be effective in reducing overall symptomatology in patients experiencing a crisis episode.

Short-term versus long-term mentalization-based therapy for outpatients with subthreshold or diagnosed borderline personality disorder: a protocol for a randomized clinical trial

Background

Psychotherapy for borderline personality disorder is often lengthy and resource-intensive. However, the current length of outpatient treatments is arbitrary and based on trials that never tested if the treatment intensity could be reduced. As a result, there is insufficient evidence to inform the decision between short-term and long-term psychotherapy for borderline personality disorder. Mentalization-based therapy is one treatment option for borderline personality disorder and consists traditionally of an 18-month treatment program.

Methods/design

This trial is an investigator-initiated single-center randomized clinical superiority trial of short-term (20 weeks) compared to long-term (14 months) mentalization-based therapy for outpatients with subthreshold or diagnosed borderline personality disorder. Participants will be recruited from the Outpatient Clinic for Personality Disorders at Stolpegaard Psychotherapy Centre, Mental Health Services, Capital Region of Denmark. Participants will be included if they meet a minimum of four DSM-V criteria for borderline personality disorder. Participants will be assessed before randomization, and at 8, 16, and 24 months after randomization. The primary outcome is severity of borderline symptomatology assessed with the Zanarini Rating Scale for borderline personality disorder. Secondary outcomes include self-harm incidents, functional impairment (Work and Social Adjustment Scale, Global Assessment of Functioning) and quality of life (Short-Form Health Survey 36). Severity of psychiatric symptoms (Symptom Checklist 90-R) will be included as an exploratory outcome. Measures of personality functioning, attachment, borderline symptoms, group alliance, and mentalization skills will be included to explore potential predictors and mechanisms of change.

Discussion

This trial will provide evidence of the beneficial and harmful effects of short-term compared to long-term mentalization-based therapy for outpatients with subthreshold or diagnosed borderline personality disorder.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03677037. Registered on September 19, 2018.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s13063-019-3306-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Mentalization-Based Treatment for Personality Disorders: Efficacy, Effectiveness, and New Developments

PURPOSE OF THE REVIEW

This review aims to outline the most recent evidence on the efficacy and effectiveness of mentalization-based treatment (MBT) for personality disorders (PD) from 2015 to 2018 and to describe new treatment developments.

RECENT FINDINGS

Since 2015, 14 new-primarily effectiveness-MBT trials have been published. The main body of studies investigated adult populations (n = 11), patients with a borderline personality disorder (BPD) diagnosis (n = 8), and compared MBT with another psychotherapeutic treatment (n = 6). The majority of studies suggest that MBT has the potential to improve the clinical outcomes for adolescents and adults with a PD diagnosis, particularly BPD, and also with comorbid diagnoses and there are indications for changes in mentalizing being a specific mechanism of change promoted by MBT. Despite promising findings, there is an urgent need for methodological sound and sufficiently powered studies to investigate both the efficacy and effectiveness of MBT, especially beyond BPD.