A service evaluation of short-term mentalisation based treatment for personality disorder.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Background
People with personality disorder experience long waiting times for access to psychological treatments, resulting from a limited availability of long-term psychotherapies and a paucity of evidence-based brief interventions. Mentalisation-based treatment (MBT) is an efficacious therapeutic modality for personality disorder, but little is known about its viability as a short-term treatment.Aims
We aimed to evaluate mental health, client satisfaction and psychological functioning outcomes before and after a 10-week group MBT programme as part of a stepped-care out-patient personality disorder service.Method
We examined routinely collected pre-post treatment outcomes from 176 individuals (73% female) aged 20-63 years, attending a dedicated out-patient personality disorder service, who completed MBT treatment. Participants completed assessments examining mentalising capacity, client satisfaction, emotional reactivity, psychiatric symptom distress and social functioning.Results
Post-MBT outcomes suggested increased mentalising capacity (mean difference 5.1, 95% CI 3.4-6.8, P < 0.001) and increased client satisfaction with care (mean difference 4.3, 95% CI 3.3-5.2, P < 0.001). Post-MBT emotional reactivity (mean difference -6.3, 95% CI -8.4 to -4.3, P < 0.001), psychiatric symptom distress (mean difference -5.2, 95% CI -6.8 to -3.7, P < 0.001) and impaired social functioning (mean difference -0.7, 95% CI -1.2 to -0.3, P = 0.002) were significantly lower than pre-treatment. Improved mentalising capacity predicted improvements in emotional reactivity (β = -0.56, P < 0.001) and social functioning (β = -0.35, P < 0.001).Conclusions
Short-term MBT as a low-intensity treatment for personality disorder was associated with positive pre-post treatment changes in social and psychological functioning. MBT as deployed in this out-patient service expands access to personality disorder treatment.
SUBMITTER: McGowan NM
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8358973 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:IntroductionBorderline personality disorder (BPD) is a severe and prevalent psychiatric disorder. Mentalization-based therapy (MBT) is an evidence-based intervention for BPD, and several countries offer treatment programs for BPD lasting for years, which is resource demanding. No previous trial has compared short-term with long-term MBT.ObjectiveThe aim of the study was to assess the efficacy and safety of short-term versus long-term MBT for outpatients with BPD.MethodsAdult outpatients (≥18 years) with subthreshold or diagnosed BPD were randomly assigned (1:1) to short-term MBT (5 months) or long-term MBT (14 months). The primary outcome was BPD symptoms assessed with the Zanarini Rating Scale for Borderline Personality Disorder. Secondary outcomes were functional impairment, quality of life, global functioning, and severe self-harm. All outcomes were primarily assessed at 16 months after randomization. This trial was prospectively registered at <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="http://ClinicalTrials.gov" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">ClinicalTrials.gov</ext-link>, NCT03677037.ResultsBetween October 4, 2018, and December 3, 2020, we randomly assigned 166 participants to short-term MBT (n = 84) or long-term MBT (n = 82). Regression analyses showed no evidence of a difference when assessing BPD symptoms (MD 0.99; 95% CI: -1.06 to 3.03; p = 0.341), level of functioning (MD 1.44; 95% CI: -1.43 to 4.32; p = 0.321), quality of life (MD -0.91; 95% CI: -4.62 to 2.79; p = 0.626), global functioning (MD -2.25; 95% CI: -6.70 to 2.20; p = 0.318), or severe self-harm (RR 1.37; 95% CI: 0.70-2.84; p = 0.335). More participants in the long-term MBT group had a serious adverse event compared with short-term MBT (RR 1.63; 95% CI: 0.94-3.07; p = 0.088), primarily driven by a difference in psychiatric hospitalizations (RR 2.03; 95% CI: 0.99-5.09; p = 0.056).ConclusionLong-term MBT did not lead to lower levels of BPD symptoms, nor did it influence any of the secondary outcomes compared with short-term MBT.
| S-EPMC10716869 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundA high proportion of individuals admitted to specialist secure hospital services for treatment of personality disorder do not complete treatment. Non-completion has been associated with poorer treatment outcomes and increased rates of recidivism and hospital readmission, when compared with individuals who do complete treatment or who do not receive treatment at all.AimsIn this study, we sought to determine the economic consequences of non-completion of treatment, using case study data from a secure hospital sample. Both health and criminal justice service perspectives were taken into account.MethodsData were collected from a medium secure hospital personality disorder unit. A probabilistic decision-analytic model was constructed, using a Markov cohort simulation with 10,000 iterations. The expected cost differential between those who do and those who do not complete treatment was estimated, as was the probability of a cost differential over a 10-year post-admission time horizon.ResultsOn average, in the first 10 years following admission, those who do not complete treatment go on to incur £52,000 more in costs to the National Health Service and criminal justice system than those who complete treatment. The model estimates that the probability that non-completers incur greater costs than completers is 78%.ConclusionIt is possible that an improvement in treatment completion rates in secure hospital personality disorder units would lead to some cost savings. This might be achievable through better selection into treatment or improved strategies for engagement and retention. Our study highlights a financial cost to society of individuals discharged from secure hospital care when incompletely treated. We suggest that it could, therefore, be useful for secure hospitals to introduce routine monitoring of treatment completion.
| S-EPMC3920639 | biostudies-literature
Project description: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.
| S-EPMC6451226 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background and objectivesPeople with personality disorders are prevalent in emergency and inpatient mental health services. We examined whether implementing a stepped care model of psychological therapy reduces demand on hospital units by people with personality disorder, in a cluster randomized controlled trial.MethodA total of 642 inpatients (average age 36.8, 50.5% female) with a primary ICD-10 personality disorder were recruited during 18 months baseline, then monitored during an 18 month active trial phase. In the active trial phase two equivalent sites were randomised to either treatment as usual (TAU), or a whole of service intervention that diverted people away from hospital and into stepped care psychological therapy clinics. The study design was cost neutral, with no additional staff or resources deployed between sites. A linear mixed models analysis evaluated outcomes.ResultsAs predicted, demand on hospital services reduced significantly in the intervention compared to TAU site. The intervention site evidenced shorter bed days, from an average of 13.46 days at baseline to 4.28 days per admission, and patients were 1.3 times less likely to re-present to the emergency department compared to TAU. Direct cost savings for implementing the approach was estimated at USD$2,720 per patient per year. Limitations included not directly comparing individual symptom changes.ConclusionsUsing a whole of service stepped care model of treatment for personality disorder significantly reduced demand on hospital services.
| S-EPMC6219775 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Several studies have shown that iron deficiency and ferritin levels are associated with parent and teacher Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) ratings. Although there are conflicting results, it has also been reported that iron supplementation may help to decrease ADHD symptoms. When all these previous studies are taken into account, it is clear that a large study investigating the effects of iron deficiency and ferritin levels on routine pharmacological treatment of ADHD with stimulants would be helpful to elucidate this treatment from a clinical point of view.A total of 345 subjects with combined or predominantly hyperactive-impulsive (PHI) subtypes of ADHD were included. All diagnoses were based on the DSM-IV criteria and ascertained by direct interviews conducted by the authors, who are experienced child psychiatrists certified in the use of the Schedule for Affective Disorders and Schizophrenia for School-Age Children - Present and Lifetime Version (K-SADS-PL) semi-structured interview. The two treatment response criteria were: 1) 25% or more decrease in pre-treatment Conners Parent Rating Scale (CPRS) and Conners Teacher Rating Scale (CTRS) Hyperactivity (HA) and Total Problems scores; 2) CPRS and CTRS HA scores lower than the cut-off point ("very improved").A total of 255 (73.9%) patients were on OROS-methylphenidate (OROS-MPH) and 90 (26.1%) were on immediate release methylphenidate (IR-MPH). The mean±sd of OROS-MPH and IR-MPH doses were 28.8±8.1 and 20.9±7.1 mg, respectively. More than half (52.5%) of the subjects were previously drug-naive at treatment inception. Two hundred and seventy eight (80.6%) subjects had combined subtype ADHD and the remainder had predominantly hyperactive-impulsive subtype. Only 60 (17.4%) of the subjects had no comorbid disorders, while 38.3% had one comorbid disorder, 32.8% had two comorbid disorders, and 11.6% had three or more comorbid disorders. The most frequent comorbidity was Oppositional Defiant Disorder/Conduct Disorder (ODD/CD, 51.6%), followed by Learning Disabilities (LD, 35.4%) and Anxiety Disorders (AD, 15.9%). Logistic regression analysis showed that subjects with comorbid ODD/CD and LD were less likely to respond to treatment. Ferritin levels and iron deficiency were not associated significantly with outcomes.In a large sample of subjects with combined or predominantly hyperactive-impulsive subtypes of ADHD, after controlling for several factors, we found that neither iron deficiency (ferritin <12 ng/ml) nor ferritin levels were associated with less favorable short-term treatment outcomes with stimulants. Subjects with comorbid ODD/CD and LD were less likely to have a 25% or more decrease in CTRS Total score. The presence of ODD/CD was also a negative predictor of treatment response in terms of CPRS Total and HA scores. The lack of a negative treatment response in ADHD subjects with iron deficiency and lack of a negative association with ferritin levels suggest that the relationship between iron metabolism and ADHD, a highly heterogeneous disorder, may be more complicated than previously believed.
| S-EPMC5551506 | biostudies-other
Project description:BackgroundPsychotherapy for borderline personality disorder is often extensive and resource-intensive. Mentalisation-based therapy is a psychodynamically oriented treatment option for borderline personality disorder, which includes a case formulation, psychoeducation, and group and individual therapy. The evidence on short-term compared with long-term mentalisation-based therapy is currently unknown.Methods/designThe Short-Term MBT Project (MBT-RCT) is a single-centre, parallel-group, investigator-initiated, randomised clinical superiority trial in which short-term (20 weeks) will be compared with long-term (14 months) mentalisation-based therapy for outpatients with subthreshold or diagnosed borderline personality disorder. Outcome assessors, data managers, the data safety and monitoring committee, statisticians, and decision-makers will be blinded to treatment allocation. Participants will be assessed before randomisation and at 8, 16, and 24 months after randomisation. The primary outcome will be the severity of borderline symptomatology assessed with the Zanarini Rating Scale for Borderline Personality Disorder. Secondary outcomes will be functional impairment (Work and Social Adjustment Scale), quality of life (Short-Form Health Survey 36-mental component), global functioning (Global Assessment of Functioning), and proportion of participants with severe self-harm. In this paper, we present a detailed statistical analysis plan including a comprehensive explanation of the planned statistical analyses, methods to handle missing data, and assessments of the underlying statistical assumptions. Final statistical analyses will be conducted independently by two statisticians following the present plan.DiscussionWe have developed this statistical analysis plan before unblinding of the trial results in line with the Declaration of Helsinki and the International Conference on Harmonization of Good Clinical Practice Guidelines, which should increase the validity of the MBT-RCT trial by mitigation of analysis bias.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT03677037 . Registered on 19 September 2018.
| S-EPMC8316699 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundBeing afraid of others' positive appraisal of oneself is called fear of positive evaluation. Fear of positive evaluation has been studied intensively in the context of social anxiety disorder (SAD). It is not known if individuals with borderline personality disorder (BPD) fear positive evaluation and which factors are associated with fear of positive evaluation in BPD.MethodsWe applied the fear of positive evaluation scale and further self-report measures (e.g., social phobia inventory, rejection sensitivity questionnaire) to 36 patients with BPD, 29 patients with SAD and 35 healthy controls (HC).ResultsA one-way ANOVA revealed that patients with BPD and patients with SAD reported significantly higher fear of positive evaluation than HC. Patients with BPD and SAD did not differ in their fear of positive evaluation. A hierarchical regression analysis revealed an association between rejection sensitivity and fear of positive evaluation in the BPD sample. However, this association disappeared when controlling for social anxiety.ConclusionOur results indicate that individuals with BPD fear positive evaluation as much as individuals with SAD do, which has implications for clinical practice. Our results further imply that social anxiety is decisive for high fear of positive evaluation in patients with SAD and patients with BPD.
| S-EPMC7444514 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundSymptom improvement in Borderline Personality Disorder (BPD) is more common than previously hypothesised. However, it remains unclear whether it reflects service users' personal goals of recovery. The present study aimed to explore what service users with BPD view as recovery.Methods48 service users were recruited from secondary mental health services and their views on their personal goals and the meaning of recovery were explored in in-depth semi-structured interviews. The study drew on grounded theory and thematic analysis.ResultsService users believed that recovery involved developing self-acceptance and self-confidence, gaining control over emotions, improving relationships, employment, and making progress in symptoms like suicidality and self-harming. They felt that psychotherapies for BPD often had an extreme focus on specific areas, like self-harming or relationships, and that some of their goals were neglected. Although full recovery was seen as a distant goal, interviewees felt that they could learn how to deal with their problems in more effective ways and make meaningful progress in their lives.ConclusionsSpecialist therapies for BPD explicitly address some of the recovery goals that are important to service users, whereas other goals are only indirectly or poorly addressed. Professionals might need to work with service users towards devising comprehensive individualised case formulations, including all treatment targets that are important to service users, their priorities, and long-term plans on how their targets might be met and which services might be involved.
| S-EPMC3355153 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundRates of non-completion of treatments for personality disorder are high and there are indications that those who do not complete treatment have worse outcomes than those who do. Improving both cost-efficiency and client welfare require attention to engaging people with personality disorder in treatment. A motivational interview, based on the Personal Concerns Inventory, may have the ability to enhance engagement and retention in therapy. Here, we report the protocol for a feasibility study for a randomised controlled trial (RCT).MethodsAll referrals accepted to the psychological service of Nottinghamshire Healthcare NHS Trust's outpatient service for people with personality disorder are eligible for inclusion. Consenting participants are randomised to receive the Personal Concerns Inventory interview plus treatment as usual or treatment as usual only. We aim to recruit 100 participants over 11/2 years. A randomised controlled trial will be considered feasible if 1 the recruitment rate to the project is 54% of all referrals (95% CI 54-64), 2 80% of clients find the intervention acceptable in terms of its practicability and usefulness (95% CI 80-91), and 3 80% of therapists report finding the intervention helpful (95% CI 80-100). In a full-scale randomised controlled trial, the primary outcome measure will be completion of treatment i.e., entry into and completion of ≥ 75% of sessions offered. Therefore, information will be collected on recruitment rates, attendance at therapy sessions, and completion of treatment. The feasibility of examining the processes of engagement will be tested by assessing the value, coherence, and attainability of goals pre-treatment, and engagement in treatment. The costs associated with the intervention will be calculated, and the feasibility of calculating the cost-benefits of the intervention will be tested. The views of clients and therapists on the intervention, collected using semi-structured interviews, will be analysed using thematic analysis.DiscussionThe Personal Concerns Interview as a preparation for treatment of people with personality has the potential to maximise treatment uptake, reduce unfilled places in treatment programmes, and prevent group treatments faltering through non-attendance. Most importantly, it has the potential to improve patient outcomes, helping them to function better and reduce hospitalisation.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.Gov.UK Identifier--NCT01132976.
| S-EPMC2964698 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe cost-effectiveness of using a mobile diary app as an adjunct in dialectical behavior therapy (DBT) in patients with borderline personality disorder is unknown.ObjectiveThis study aims to perform an economic evaluation of a mobile diary app compared with paper-based diary cards in DBT treatment for patients with borderline personality disorder in a psychiatric outpatient facility.MethodsThis study was conducted alongside a pragmatic, multicenter, randomized controlled trial. The participants were recruited at 5 Danish psychiatric outpatient facilities and were randomized to register the emotions, urges, and skills used in a mobile diary app or on paper-based diary cards. The participants in both groups received DBT delivered by the therapists. A cost-consequence analysis with a time horizon of 12 months was performed. Consequences included quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), depression severity, borderline severity, suicidal behavior, health care use, treatment compliance, and system usability. All relevant costs were included. Focus group interviews were conducted with patients, therapists, researchers, and industry representatives to discuss the potential advantages and disadvantages of using a mobile diary app.ResultsA total of 78 participants were included in the analysis. An insignificantly higher number of participants in the paper group dropped out before the start of treatment (P=.07). Of those starting treatment, participants in the app group had an average of 37.1 (SE 27.55) more days of treatment and recorded an average of 3.16 (SE 5.10) more skills per week than participants in the paper group. Participants in both groups had a QALY gain and a decrease in depression severity, borderline severity, and suicidal behavior. Significant differences were found in favor of the paper group for both QALY gain (adjusted difference -0.054; SE 0.03) and reduction in depression severity (adjusted difference -1.11; SE 1.57). The between-group difference in total costs ranged from US $107.37 to US $322.10 per participant during the 12 months. The use of services in the health care sector was similar across both time points and groups (difference: psychiatric hospitalization <5 and <5; general practice -1.32; SE 3.68 and 2.02; SE 3.19). Overall, the patients showed high acceptability and considered the app as being easy to use. Therapists worried about potential negative influences on the therapist-patient interaction from new work tasks accompanying the introduction of the new technology but pointed at innovation potential from digital database registrations.ConclusionsThis study suggests both positive and negative consequences of mobile diary apps as adjuncts to DBT compared with paper diary cards. More research is needed to draw conclusions regarding its cost-effectiveness.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT03191565; http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03191565.International registered report identifier (irrid)RR2-10.2196/17737.
| S-EPMC8663638 | biostudies-literature