Pharmacological interventions for antisocial personality disorder

Update on Antisocial Personality Disorder

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Antisocial personality disorder (ASPD) is a characterized by lifelong or recurrent behavioral problems that begin in childhood or early adolescence. This communication provides an overview on ASPD including findings from recent reviews and new research.

RECENT FINDINGS

With regard to DSM-5's Section III Alternative Model of Personality Disorder criteria for ASPD, advocates point to the broader symptom coverage and harmonization with ICD-11; yet critics point to the lack of evidence for improved outcomes. A new report shows that antisocial individuals age faster than non-antisocial peers. ASPD has high heritability and newer molecular studies have found intriguing linkages to genes associated with crucial brain regions. A mentalization-based therapy model has been developed and early work shows promise. ASPD is common, widespread, and disruptive to individuals, families, and society. Chronic and lifelong, ASPD typically lessens in severity with advancing age. Assessment rests on the individual's history because there are no diagnostic tests. ASPD likely results from an interplay of genetic and environmental factors. Brain imaging studies have linked cortical dysfunction to antisocial behavior in crucial brain regions. Medication is sometimes targeted at the individual's aggression and irritability, but a more rational approach is to target co-occurring disorders. Cognitive-behavioral therapy and mentalization-based therapy models have been developed and are being studied.

Pharmacological strategies for the management of the antisocial personality disorder

INTRODUCTION

Antisocial personality disorder (AsPD) is a pervasive pattern of violation of others' rights, related to the concept of psychopathy. AsPD is stable over time from adolescence, with evidence of conduct disorder (CD) before 15 years. DSM-5 included a specifier 'with limited prosocial emotions' (LPE), which characterizes adolescents with higher developmental vulnerability to develop AsPD. Despite being relatively frequent with considerable societal impact, AsPD is a difficult-to-treat condition with high comorbidity rates and poor evidence for effective pharmacological interventions.

AREAS COVERED

We conducted a narrative review and searched PubMed up to September 2022. We included RCTs and naturalistic studies evaluating pharmacological interventions on AsPD in adults, including those with comorbid substance use disorder or psychopathic traits. Evidence in youths with CD, callous-unemotional (CU) traits and aggression were also reviewed, exploring the role of CU traits as moderators of response.

EXPERT OPINION

Psychosocial interventions are the first option, with possible improvement of CU traits, beyond behavioral and affective symptoms, particularly if implemented early during development. Limited information, based on low-quality studies, supports the pharmacological options. Second-generation antipsychotics, lithium, anti-epileptic drugs, and stimulants are first-line medications, according to different target symptoms. Developmental pathways including ADHD suggest a specific role of psychostimulants.

Pharmacotherapy of Primary Impulsive Aggression in Violent Criminal Offenders

Primary impulsive aggression (PIA) can be implicated as a common factor that results in an arrest, disciplinary, and restraint measures during confinement, and criminal recidivism after release. Evidence suggests that anti-impulsive aggression agents (AIAAs) can diminish or prevent impulsive aggression even when occurring with personality pathology such as borderline or antisocial personality disorder (ASPD), common conditions in offender populations. A previous review identified agents that have been subjected to controlled drug trials of sufficient quality, and subsequently, a decisional algorithm was developed for selecting an AIAA for individuals with IA. This selection process began with the five agents that showed efficacy in two or more quality studies from the earlier review. Today, 8 years after the quality review study, the present authors undertook this follow-up literature review. The aims of the present review were to survey the literature to identify and assess: (1) drug trials of comparable quality published since the 2013 review, including trials of the previously identified AIAAs as well as trials of agents not included in the earlier review; (2) severity of aggressive outbursts; (3) the materiality of risks or side-effects that are associated with individual AIAAs as well as antipsychotic agents commonly used to control clinical aggression; (4) efficacy of these agents in special populations (e.g., females); and (5) cost and convenience of each agent. Improved pharmacotherapy of PIA by addressing risks, side effects and practicality as well as the efficacy of AIAAs, should promote the rehabilitation and reintegration of some pathologically aggressive offenders back into the community.

Who is prescribed valproate and how carefully is this treatment reviewed in UK mental health services? Data from a clinical audit

BACKGROUND

The licensed indications for valproate are narrow, yet this medication is commonly prescribed in mental health services.

OBJECTIVES

To explore the target symptoms/behaviours for which valproate is prescribed and how well the efficacy and tolerability of this treatment are monitored in routine clinical practice.

DESIGN

An audit-based quality improvement (QI) programme in UK mental health services.

METHODS

Information on valproate prescribing was collected from clinical records using a bespoke data collection tool.

RESULTS

Sixty-four NHS mental health Trusts/healthcare organisations submitted data on valproate treatment for 5320 patients. Valproate was clearly prescribed for a licensed indication in 1995 (38%) patients, off-label in 1987 (37%) while the indication was uncertain/not available in 1338 (25%). Of the 919 patients started on valproate treatment within the past year, between a half and two-thirds had each of the relevant baseline physical health checks documented. In 539 (59%) of these patients, valproate was prescribed for an unlicensed indication; the prescription was recognised as off-label in 363 (67%), 20 (6%) of whom were documented as having had this explained to them. Of 631 patients prescribed valproate for between 3 months and a year, early on-treatment assessments of response and side effects were documented in 441 (70%) and 332 (53%), respectively. Of 4401 patients treated for more than a year, annual on-treatment reviews of clinical response and side effects were documented in 2771 (63%) and 2140 (49%), respectively.

CONCLUSION

Our data suggest the majority of prescriptions for valproate in mental health services are not for a licensed indication. Furthermore, patients rarely receive an explanation that their valproate prescription is off-label, perhaps partly because the licensed indications are not widely understood by prescribers. Given the very limited evidence for efficacy for the off-label uses of valproate, failure to routinely conduct early on-treatment and annual reviews of the benefits and side effects of this medication may result in patients remaining on ineffective and poorly tolerated treatment by default.

Mentalization for Offending Adult Males (MOAM): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial to evaluate mentalization-based treatment for antisocial personality disorder in male offenders on community probation

Background

Antisocial personality disorder (ASPD), although associated with very significant health and social burden, is an under-researched mental disorder for which clinically effective and cost-effective treatment methods are urgently needed. No intervention has been established for prevention or as the treatment of choice for this disorder. Mentalization-based treatment (MBT) is a psychotherapeutic treatment that has shown some promising preliminary results for reducing personality disorder symptomatology by specifically targeting the ability to recognize and understand the mental states of oneself and others, an ability that is compromised in people with ASPD. This paper describes the protocol of a multi-site RCT designed to test the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of MBT for reducing aggression and alleviating the wider symptoms of ASPD in male offenders subject to probation supervision who fulfil diagnostic criteria for ASPD.

Methods

Three hundred and two participants recruited from a pool of offenders subject to statutory supervision by the National Probation Service at 13 sites across the UK will be randomized on a 1:1 basis to 12 months of probation plus MBT or standard probation as usual, with follow-up to 24 months post-randomization. The primary outcome is frequency of aggressive antisocial behaviour as assessed by the Overt Aggression Scale – Modified. Secondary outcomes include violence, offending rates, alcohol use, drug use, mental health status, quality of life, and total service use costs. Data will be gathered from police and criminal justice databases, NHS record linkage, and interviews and self-report measures administered to participants. Primary analysis will be on an intent-to-treat basis; per-protocol analysis will be undertaken as secondary analysis. The primary outcome will be analysed using hierarchical mixed-effects linear regression. Secondary outcomes will be analysed using mixed-effects linear regression, mixed-effects logistic regression, and mixed-effects Poisson models for secondary outcomes depending on whether the outcome is continuous, binary, or count data. A cost-effectiveness and cost-utility analysis will be undertaken.

Discussion

This definitive, national, multi-site trial is of sufficient size to evaluate MBT to inform policymakers, service commissioners, clinicians, and service users about its potential to treat offenders with ASPD and the likely impact on the population at risk.

Trial registration

ISRCTN 32309003. Registered on 8 April 2016.

Pharmacological interventions for antisocial personality disorder

BACKGROUND

Antisocial personality disorder (AsPD) is associated with rule-breaking, criminality, substance use, unemployment, relationship difficulties, and premature death. Certain types of medication (drugs) may help people with AsPD. This review updates a previous Cochrane review, published in 2010.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits and adverse effects of pharmacological interventions for adults with AsPD.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, 13 other databases and two trials registers up to 5 September 2019. We also checked reference lists and contacted study authors to identify studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials in which adults (age 18 years and over) with a diagnosis of AsPD or dissocial personality disorder were allocated to a pharmacological intervention or placebo control condition.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Four authors independently selected studies and extracted data. We assessed risk of bias and created 'Summary of findings tables' and assessed the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE framework. The primary outcomes were: aggression; reconviction; global state/global functioning; social functioning; and adverse events.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 11 studies (three new to this update), involving 416 participants with AsPD. Most studies (10/11) were conducted in North America. Seven studies were conducted exclusively in an outpatient setting, one in an inpatient setting, and one in prison; two studies used multiple settings. The average age of participants ranged from 28.6 years to 45.1 years (overall mean age 39.6 years). Participants were predominantly (90%) male. Study duration ranged from 6 to 24 weeks, with no follow-up period. Data were available from only four studies involving 274 participants with AsPD. All the available data came from unreplicated, single reports, and did not allow independent statistical analysis to be conducted. Many review findings were limited to descriptive summaries based on analyses carried out and reported by the trial investigators. No study set out to recruit participants on the basis of having AsPD; many participants presented primarily with substance abuse problems. The studies reported on four primary outcomes and six secondary outcomes. Primary outcomes were aggression (six studies) global/state functioning (three studies), social functioning (one study), and adverse events (seven studies). Secondary outcomes were leaving the study early (eight studies), substance misuse (five studies), employment status (one study), impulsivity (one study), anger (three studies), and mental state (three studies). No study reported data on the primary outcome of reconviction or the secondary outcomes of quality of life, engagement with services, satisfaction with treatment, housing/accommodation status, economic outcomes or prison/service outcomes.   Eleven different drugs were compared with placebo, but data for AsPD participants were only available for five comparisons. Three classes of drug were represented: antiepileptic; antidepressant; and dopamine agonist (anti-Parkinsonian) drugs. We considered selection bias to be unclear in 8/11 studies, attrition bias to be high in 7/11 studies, and performance bias to be low in 7/11 studies. Using GRADE, we rated the certainty of evidence for each outcome in this review as very low, meaning that we have very little confidence in the effect estimates reported. Phenytoin (antiepileptic) versus placebo One study (60 participants) reported very low-certainty evidence that phenytoin (300 mg/day), compared to placebo, may reduce the mean frequency of aggressive acts per week (phenytoin mean = 0.33, no standard deviation (SD) reported; placebo mean = 0.51, no SD reported) in male prisoners with aggression (skewed data) at endpoint (six weeks). The same study (60 participants) reported no evidence of difference between phenytoin and placebo in the number of participants reporting the adverse event of nausea during week one (odds ratio (OR) 1.00, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.06 to 16.76; very low-certainty evidence). The study authors also reported that no important side effects were detectable via blood cell counts or liver enzyme tests (very low-certainty evidence). The study did not measure reconviction, global/state functioning or social functioning. Desipramine (antidepressant) versus placebo One study (29 participants) reported no evidence of a difference between desipramine (250 to 300 mg/day) and placebo on mean social functioning scores (desipramine = 0.19; placebo = 0.21), assessed with the family-social domain of the Addiction Severity Index (scores range from zero to one, with higher values indicating worse social functioning), at endpoint (12 weeks) (very low-certainty evidence). Neither of the studies included in this comparison measured the other primary outcomes: aggression; reconviction; global/state functioning; or adverse events. Nortriptyline (antidepressant) versus placebo One study (20 participants) reported no evidence of a difference between nortriptyline (25 to 75 mg/day) and placebo on mean global state/functioning scores (nortriptyline = 0.3; placebo = 0.7), assessed with the Symptom Check List-90 (SCL-90) Global Severity Index (GSI; mean of subscale scores, ranging from zero to four, with higher scores indicating greater severity of symptoms), at endpoint (six months) in men with alcohol dependency (very low-certainty evidence). The study measured side effects but did not report data on adverse events for the AsPD subgroup. The study did not measure aggression, reconviction or social functioning. Bromocriptine (dopamine agonist) versus placebo One study (18 participants) reported no evidence of difference between bromocriptine (15 mg/day) and placebo on mean global state/functioning scores (bromocriptine = 0.4; placebo = 0.7), measured with the GSI of the SCL-90 at endpoint (six months) (very low-certainty evidence). The study did not provide data on adverse effects, but reported that 12 patients randomised to the bromocriptine group experienced severe side effects, five of whom dropped out of the study in the first two days due to nausea and severe flu-like symptoms (very low-certainty evidence). The study did not measure aggression, reconviction and social functioning. Amantadine (dopamine agonist) versus placebo The study in this comparison did not measure any of the primary outcomes.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The evidence summarised in this review is insufficient to draw any conclusion about the use of pharmacological interventions in the treatment of antisocial personality disorder. The evidence comes from single, unreplicated studies of mostly older medications. The studies also have methodological issues that severely limit the confidence we can draw from their results. Future studies should recruit participants on the basis of having AsPD, and use relevant outcome measures, including reconviction.

Psychological interventions for antisocial personality disorder

BACKGROUND

Antisocial personality disorder (AsPD) is associated with poor mental health, criminality, substance use and relationship difficulties. This review updates Gibbon 2010 (previous version of the review).

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the potential benefits and adverse effects of psychological interventions for adults with AsPD.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, 13 other databases and two trials registers up to 5 September 2019. We also searched reference lists and contacted study authors to identify studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials of adults, where participants with an AsPD or dissocial personality disorder diagnosis comprised at least 75% of the sample randomly allocated to receive a psychological intervention, treatment-as-usual (TAU), waiting list or no treatment. The primary outcomes were aggression, reconviction, global state/functioning, social functioning and adverse events.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.

MAIN RESULTS

This review includes 19 studies (eight new to this update), comparing a psychological intervention against TAU (also called 'standard Maintenance'(SM) in some studies). Eight of the 18 psychological interventions reported data on our primary outcomes. Four studies focussed exclusively on participants with AsPD, and 15 on subgroups of participants with AsPD. Data were available from only 10 studies involving 605 participants. Eight studies were conducted in the UK and North America, and one each in Iran, Denmark and the Netherlands. Study duration ranged from 4 to 156 weeks (median = 26 weeks). Most participants (75%) were male; the mean age was 35.5 years. Eleven studies (58%) were funded by research councils. Risk of bias was high for 13% of criteria, unclear for 54% and low for 33%. Cognitive behaviour therapy (CBT) + TAU versus TAU One study (52 participants) found no evidence of a difference between CBT + TAU and TAU for physical aggression (odds ratio (OR) 0.92, 95% CI 0.28 to 3.07; low-certainty evidence) for outpatients at 12 months post-intervention. One study (39 participants) found no evidence of a difference between CBT + TAU and TAU for social functioning (mean difference (MD) -1.60 points, 95% CI -5.21 to 2.01; very low-certainty evidence), measured by the Social Functioning Questionnaire (SFQ; range = 0-24), for outpatients at 12 months post-intervention. Impulsive lifestyle counselling (ILC) + TAU versus TAU One study (118 participants) found no evidence of a difference between ILC + TAU and TAU for trait aggression (assessed with Buss-Perry Aggression Questionnaire-Short Form) for outpatients at nine months (MD 0.07, CI -0.35 to 0.49; very low-certainty evidence). One study (142 participants) found no evidence of a difference between ILC + TAU and TAU alone for the adverse event of death (OR 0.40, 95% CI 0.04 to 4.54; very low-certainty evidence) or incarceration (OR 0.70, 95% CI 0.27 to 1.86; very low-certainty evidence) for outpatients between three and nine months follow-up. Contingency management (CM) + SM versus SM One study (83 participants) found evidence that, compared to SM alone, CM + SM may improve social functioning measured by family/social scores on the Addiction Severity Index (ASI; range = 0 (no problems) to 1 (severe problems); MD -0.08, 95% CI -0.14 to -0.02; low-certainty evidence) for outpatients at six months. 'Driving whilst intoxicated' programme (DWI) + incarceration versus incarceration One study (52 participants) found no evidence of a difference between DWI + incarceration and incarceration alone on reconviction rates (hazard ratio 0.56, CI -0.19 to 1.31; very low-certainty evidence) for prisoner participants at 24 months. Schema therapy (ST) versus TAU One study (30 participants in a secure psychiatric hospital, 87% had AsPD diagnosis) found no evidence of a difference between ST and TAU for the number of participants who were reconvicted (OR 2.81, 95% CI 0.11 to 74.56, P = 0.54) at three years. The same study found that ST may be more likely to improve social functioning (assessed by the mean number of days until patients gain unsupervised leave (MD -137.33, 95% CI -271.31 to -3.35) compared to TAU, and no evidence of a difference between the groups for overall adverse events, classified as the number of people experiencing a global negative outcome over a three-year period (OR 0.42, 95% CI 0.08 to 2.19). The certainty of the evidence for all outcomes was very low. Social problem-solving (SPS) + psychoeducation (PE) versus TAU One study (17 participants) found no evidence of a difference between SPS + PE and TAU for participants' level of social functioning (MD -1.60 points, 95% CI -5.43 to 2.23; very low-certainty evidence) assessed with the SFQ at six months post-intervention. Dialectical behaviour therapy versus TAU One study (skewed data, 14 participants) provided very low-certainty, narrative evidence that DBT may reduce the number of self-harm days for outpatients at two months post-intervention compared to TAU. Psychosocial risk management (PSRM; 'Resettle') versus TAU One study (skewed data, 35 participants) found no evidence of a difference between PSRM and TAU for a number of officially recorded offences at one year after release from prison. It also found no evidence of difference between the PSRM and TAU for the adverse event of death during the study period (OR 0.89, 95% CI 0.05 to 14.83, P = 0.94, 72 participants (90% had AsPD), 1 study, very low-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is very limited evidence available on psychological interventions for adults with AsPD. Few interventions addressed the primary outcomes of this review and, of the eight that did, only three (CM + SM, ST and DBT) showed evidence that the intervention may be more effective than the control condition. No intervention reported compelling evidence of change in antisocial behaviour. Overall, the certainty of the evidence was low or very low, meaning that we have little confidence in the effect estimates reported. The conclusions of this update have not changed from those of the original review, despite the addition of eight new studies. This highlights the ongoing need for further methodologically rigorous studies to yield further data to guide the development and application of psychological interventions for AsPD and may suggest that a new approach is required.

Identification and validation of risk factors for antisocial behaviour involving police

Adult antisocial behaviour has precursors in childhood and adolescence and is most successfully treated using childhood interventions. The aim of this study was to identify and validate robust risk factors for antisocial behaviour involving police contact in a data-driven, hypothesis-free framework. Antisocial behavior involving police contact (20/25% incidence) as well as 554 other behavioural and environmental measures were assessed in the longitudinal general population Estonian Children Personality Behaviour and Health Study sample (n=872). The strongest risk factors for antisocial behaviour included past substance use disorder, gender, aggressive mode of action upon provocation, and concentration difficulties and physical fighting in school at age 15 years. Prediction using the selected variables for both methods in the other, unseen cohort resulted in an area under the receiver operating characteristics curve of 0.78-0.84. Our work confirms known risk factors for antisocial behaviour as well as identifies novel specific risk factors. Together, these provide good predictive power in an unseen cohort. Our identification and validation of risk factors for antisocial behaviour can aid early intervention for at-risk individuals.

„Die Relevanz eines kohärenten forensischen Beurteilungs- und Behandlungsprozesses“: großer Wurf oder alter Wein in undichtem Schlauch?

Borchard und Gerth legen in ihrem Beitrag „Die Relevanz eines kohärenten forensischen Beurteilungs- und Behandlungsprozesses: Grenzen der allgemeinpsychiatrischen Diagnosesysteme ICD und DSM für die forensische Fallkonzeption“ (Borchard und Gerth 2020) ein Plädoyer für ein eigenes forensisch-psychiatrisches Diagnosesystem vor. Der folgende Beitrag setzt sich mit diesem Anliegen kritisch auseinander und zeigt, warum der Forderung nach einem forensisch-psychiatrischen Diagnosesystem jenseits von DSM‑5 und ICD-10/ICD-11 nicht gefolgt werden kann. Ein eigener forensisch psychiatrischer Diagnose- und Krankheitsbegriff ist weder erforderlich, noch kann er in der juristisch-medizinischen Schnittstelle sinnvoll angewandt werden. Stattdessen drohen terminologische Schwierigkeiten und die Gefahr einer Pathologisierung delinquenten Verhaltens, was am Beispiel des von Borchard und Gerth empfohlenen FOTRES und Urteilen des Schweizerischen Bundesgerichts dargestellt und diskutiert wird.

Impulsive and premeditated aggression in male offenders with antisocial personality disorder

INTRODUCTION

Aggression is a clinical symptom of various psychiatric disorders that can be conceptualised as a physical act towards another person with the intent to cause harm. In antisocial personality disorder (ASPD), aggression is a frequent manifestation that differently compromise therapeutic and prognostic goals according to its impulsive or premeditated categorisation. ASPD is characterised by high levels of impulsivity, psychopathic traits, and a high prevalence of co-morbid substance use disorders (SUDs). Aggression in ASPD patients may determine long and recurrent imprisonment thus representing a challenge clinicians and legal experts face.

OBJECTIVES

Our aims were to characterise impulsive and premeditated aggression in male ASPD offenders as well as to determine the potential role of SUDs, impulsivity, and psychopathic traits as predictors.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this cross-sectional study we evaluated a sample of ASPD offenders with a battery of clinical and psychometric, standardised instruments: the Psychopathy Checklist-Revised (PCL-R), the European Version of the Addiction Severity Index (EuropASI), the Barratt Impulsivity Scale Version 11 (BIS-11), and the Impulsive/Premeditated Aggression Scale (IPAS).

RESULTS

We used a total sample of 134 offenders, all of whom were male. ASPD patients (n = 96) had a 71.9% prevalence of impulsive aggression and a 28.1% prevalence of premeditated aggression. ASPD patients with impulsive aggression had significantly lower scores of total PCL-R (p<0.01) factor 1 and interpersonal facet 1 (p<0.05), compared with ASPD patients with premeditated aggression. ASPD patients with impulsive aggression and ASPD patients with premeditated aggression had comparable BIS-11 mean scores, and exhibited an equal prevalence of SUDs. The interpersonal facet 1of the PCL-R predicted the aggression type (p<0.05) in ASPD patients, and the exponential beta value for facet 1 was 1.42 (CI = 1.03; 1.95).

CONCLUSIONS

The aggression type that is associated with ASPD is mainly impulsive in nature. ASPD patients who have higher scores of psychopathic traits have a lower probability of exhibiting impulsive aggression and a higher probability of exhibiting premeditated aggression. Although ASPD patients have high levels of impulsivity and a high frequency of SUDs, these two variables were not predictors of the aggression type.

Alcohol Use Disorder and Antisocial and Borderline Personality Disorders

Alcohol use disorder (AUD) frequently co-occurs with other psychiatric disorders, including personality disorders, which are pervasive, persistent, and impairing. Personality disorders are associated with myriad serious outcomes, have a high degree of co-occurrence with substance use disorders, including AUD, and incur significant health care costs. This literature review focuses on co-occurring AUD and personality disorders characterized by impulsivity and affective dysregulation, specifically antisocial personality disorders and borderline personality disorders. Prevalence rates, potential explanations and causal models of co-occurrence, prognoses, and the status of existing treatment research are summarized. Several important future research considerations are relevant to these complex, co-occurring conditions. Research assessing mechanisms responsible for co-occurring AUD and antisocial personality disorder or borderline personality disorder will further delineate the underlying developmental processes and improve understanding of onset and courses. In addition, increased focus on the efficacy and effectiveness of treatments targeting underlying traits or common factors in these disorders will inform future prevention and treatment efforts, as interventions targeting these co-occurring conditions have relatively little empirical support.

Psychological and psychosocial interventions offered to forensic mental health inpatients: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

To examine the evidence for the use of psychological and psychosocial interventions offered to forensic mental health inpatients.

DESIGN

CINAHL, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, ScienceDirect and Web of Science databases were searched for research published in English between 1 January 1990 and 31 May 2018.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Disturbance, mental well-being, quality of life, recovery, violence/risk, satisfaction, seclusion, symptoms, therapeutic relationship and ward environment. There were no limits on the length of follow-up.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trial (RCT) studies of any psychological or psychosocial intervention in an inpatient forensic setting. Pilot or feasibility studies were included if an RCT design was used.We restricted our search criteria to inpatients in low, medium and high secure units aged over 18. We focused on interventions considered applicable to most patients residing in forensic mental health settings.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Two independent reviewers extracted data and assessed risk of bias.

RESULTS

17 232 citations were identified with 195 full manuscripts examined in detail. Nine papers were included in the review. The heterogeneity of the identified studies meant that meta-analysis was inappropriate. The results were presented in table form together with a narrative synthesis. Only 7 out of 91 comparisons revealed statistically significant results with no consistent significant findings. The most frequently reported outcomes were violence/risk and symptoms. 61% of the violence/risk comparisons and 79% of the symptom comparisons reported improvements in the intervention groups compared with the control groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Current practice is based on limited evidence with no consistent significant findings. This review suggests psychoeducational and psychosocial interventions did not reduce violence/risk, but there is tentative support they may improve symptoms. More RCTs are required with: larger sample sizes, representative populations, standardised outcomes and control group interventions similar in treatment intensity to the intervention.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42017067099.

Gene-environment interactions in antisocial behavior are mediated by early-life 5-HT2A receptor activation

The ontogeny of antisocial behavior (ASB) is rooted in complex gene-environment (G×E) interactions. The best-characterized of these interplays occurs between: a) low-activity alleles of the gene encoding monoamine oxidase A (MAOA), the main serotonin-degrading enzyme; and b) child maltreatment. The purpose of this study was to develop the first animal model of this G×E interaction, to help understand the neurobiological mechanisms of ASB and identify novel targets for its therapy. Maoa hypomorphic transgenic mice were exposed to an early-life stress regimen consisting of maternal separation and daily intraperitoneal saline injections and were then compared with their wild-type and non-stressed controls for ASB-related neurobehavioral phenotypes. Maoa hypomorphic mice subjected to stress from postnatal day (PND) 1 through 7 - but not during the second postnatal week - developed overt aggression, social deficits and abnormal stress responses from the fourth week onwards. On PND 8, these mice exhibited low resting heart rate - a well-established premorbid sign of ASB - and a significant and selective up-regulation of serotonin 5-HT_2A receptors in the prefrontal cortex. Notably, both aggression and neonatal bradycardia were rescued by the 5-HT₂ receptor antagonist ketanserin (1-3 mg kg^-1, IP), as well as the selective 5-HT_2A receptor blocker MDL-100,907 (volinanserin, 0.1-0.3 mg kg^-1, IP) throughout the first postnatal week. These findings provide the first evidence of a molecular basis of G×E interactions in ASB and point to early-life 5-HT_2A receptor activation as a key mechanism for the ontogeny of this condition. This article is part of the Special Issue entitled 'The neuropharmacology of social behavior: from bench to bedside'.

Correlates of Aggression in Personality Disorders: an Update

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review article aims at giving an update on studies investigating correlates of aggression in personality disorders during the last 5 years.

RECENT FINDINGS

Most data refer to borderline personality disorder (BPD) and antisocial personality disorder (ASPD). In BPD, emotion dysregulation, hypersensitivity to interpersonal rejection/threat, increased rumination, increased negative urgency, aggression-related knowledge structures, and invalidation were either corroborated or emerged as psychological correlates of aggression, while reduced ambiguity sensitivity, hyposensitivity to interpersonal threat, and reduced mindfulness were associated with aggression in ASPD. Neurobiologically, alterations of the monoaminooxidase-A-, the oxytocinergic-, and the prefrontal-limbic-system as well as increases of the thyroid hormone T3, γ-aminobutyric acid and several inflammatory markers were associated with increased aggression across various personality disorders. Our understanding of correlates of aggression in personality disorders has increased over the last 5 years. More efforts in improving the conceptualization of personality disorders and aggression are needed to develop innovative treatments for those affected.

Validation of the Portuguese Version of Impulsive-Premeditated Aggression Scale in an Inmate Population

Aggression is one of the core symptoms of antisocial personality disorder (ASPD) with therapeutic and prognostic relevance. ASPD is highly prevalent among inmates, being responsible for adverse events and elevated direct and indirect economic costs for the criminal justice system. The Impulsive/Premeditated Aggression Scale (IPAS) is a self-report instrument that characterizes aggression as either predominately impulsive or premeditated. This study aims to determine the validity and reliability of the IPAS in a sample of Portuguese inmates. A total of 240 inmates were included in the study. A principal component factor analysis was performed so as to obtain the construct validity of the IPAS impulsive aggression (IA) and premeditated aggression (PM) subscales; internal consistency was determined by Cronbach's alpha coefficient; convergent and divergent validity of the subscales were determined analyzing correlations with the Barratt Impulsiveness scale, 11th version (BIS-11), and the Psychopathic Checklist Revised (PCL-R). The rotated matrix with two factors accounted for 49.9% of total variance. IA subscale had 11 items and PM subscale had 10 items. The IA and PM subscales had a good Cronbach's alpha values of 0.89 and 0.88, respectively. The IA subscale is correlated with BIS-11 attentional, motor, and non-planning impulsiveness dimensions (p < 0.05). The PM subscale is correlated with BIS-11 attentional, motor impulsiveness dimensions (p < 0.05). The PM subscale is correlated with PCL-R interpersonal, lifestyle, and antisocial dimensions (p < 0.05). The IA subscale is not correlated with PCL-R. The Portuguese translated version of IPAS has adequate psychometric properties, allowing the measurement of impulsive and premeditated dimensions of aggression.

Pharmacotherapy of personality disorders: what we know and what we have to search for

Pharmacotherapy for personality disorders is in the early stage of development because the evidence base for effective drug treatment is insufficient, biased toward borderline personality disorder and rampant with methodological issues. In this paper, we reviewed randomized, placebo-controlled trials of drugs efficacy in patients with personality disorders published between 1990 and 2016. Overwhelming majority of studies focused on borderline personality disorder, and the accumulation of evidence resulted in seven meta-analyses, which are interpreted into better strategies for evidence-based practice. Little research attention was given to schizotypal and antisocial personality disorders, with only indirect treatment efficacy evidence for the obsessive–compulsive and avoidant personality disorders. Some avenues for future efficacy research are indicated.

Evaluating the impact of the London Pathway Project

BACKGROUND

The London Pathway Project (LPP) is an innovative whole-systems approach to addressing the needs of offenders who have severe personality disorder, with the goal of reducing their risk of harm. Previous research has evaluated the initial implementation of the LPP.

AIMS

This paper focused on evaluating the impact of the LPP on a number of criminogenic needs over time and its impact on the risk of reoffending and harm compared with a similar group who did not experience the pathway.

METHOD

Data for men who had been identified for the LPP were used to explore changes in key criminogenic needs an average of 11 months after commencing on the pathway. In addition, Offender Assessment System data was used to match men who had experienced the LPP for at least 12 months to a comparison group on key demographic and criminal history variables. Changes in validated risk assessment devices and changes in practitioners' perception of risk were examined.

RESULTS

The LPP was associated with desirable within-individual change for most of the criminogenic needs explored. However, strong non-desirable changes in lifestyle and associates were also identified, but this was particularly the case for those sentenced to prison. When compared with a matched group, those identified for the pathway showed a significant reduction on an objective measure of risk of reoffending but were rated as having significantly increased risk of harm on the basis of practitioner's perceptions. There was no evidence that greater progression along the pathway was associated with greater benefits.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first impact evaluation of the LPP, and the results were generally positive in terms of its relation to criminogenic needs and risks. Much more research that clearly links project inputs to actual behavioural outcomes, such as later reoffending, is needed.

IMPLICATIONS

This initial evaluation of the impact of the LPP could be used as baseline data to examine the impact of the pathway over time, and with greater precision (e.g. matching on personality features). Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Effectiveness of work skills programmes for offenders with mental disorders: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Academic literature and government initiatives have emphasised the importance of work as a means of improving health and reducing reoffending among offenders with mental disorders. Whilst a number of work skills programmes have shown promise for offenders more generally, evaluation of evidence for their effectiveness for those with a mental disorder is lacking, particularly in relation to improving employment outcomes.

AIMS

To assess the evidence on the effectiveness of work skills programmes for mentally disordered offenders.

METHOD

A systematic review of the literature was conducted by searching the following databases: PsycINFO, CINAHL, Cochrane Library (Trials Register), Embase and Medline, using search terms which included Work Skills Programme*, Offend* and Mental*. Any empirical comparison study of work skills programmes was included in this review. The primary outcome was employment. Secondary outcomes included employment outcomes, reoffending, education, mental state, substance misuse, global functioning, quality of life, acceptability, leaving the study early and cost effectiveness or other economic outcomes.

RESULTS

Six articles met the inclusion criteria. Collectively they provided limited evidence that work skills programmes increase the likelihood of people with mental disorder who are offenders obtaining employment in the short term, but there are insufficient studies to determine the long-term impact of work skills programmes.

CONCLUSIONS

There is modest evidence to support inclusion of specific work skills programmes in the treatment of offenders with mental disorder. Future studies should be of theoretically driven programmes, such as Individual Placement Support (IPS), and use a standard set of relevant outcome measures and long enough follow-up for testing the effectiveness of any programme on engagement in competitive, paid employment as, even if skilled, offenders with mental disorder must constitute a hard to place group. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Psychoanalytic-Interactional Therapy versus Psychodynamic Therapy by Experts for Personality Disorders: A Randomized Controlled Efficacy-Effectiveness Study in Cluster B Personality Disorders

BACKGROUND

With regard to cluster B personality disorders, most psychotherapeutic treatments focus on borderline personality disorder. Evidence-based treatments for patients with other cluster B personality disorders are not yet available. Psychoanalytic-interactional therapy (PIT) represents a transdiagnostic treatment for severe personality disorders. PIT has been applied in clinical practice for many years and has proven effective in open studies. In a randomized controlled trial, we compared manual-guided PIT to nonmanualized pychodynamic therapy by experts in personality disorders (E-PDT) in patients with cluster B personality disorders.

METHODS

In an inpatient setting, patients with cluster B personality disorders were randomly assigned to manual-guided PIT (n = 64) or nonmanualized E-PDT (n = 58). In addition, a quasi-experimental control condition was used (n = 46) including both patients receiving treatment as usual and patients waiting for treatment. Primary outcomes were level of personality organization and overall psychological distress. As secondary outcomes, depression, anxiety and interpersonal problems were examined.

RESULTS

No significant improvements were found in the control patients. Both PIT and E-PDT achieved significant improvements in all outcome measures and were superior to the control condition. No differences were found between PIT and E-PDT in any outcome measure at the end of treatment. The type of cluster B personality disorder had no impact on the results.

CONCLUSIONS

In an inpatient setting, both PIT and E-PDT proved to be superior to a control condition in cluster B personality disorders. In a head-to-head comparison, both treatments appeared to be equally effective. Further research on the treatment of cluster B personality disorders is required.

Possible role of a dysregulation of the endogenous opioid system in antisocial personality disorder

Around half the inmates in prison institutions have antisocial personality disorder (ASPD). A recent theory has proposed that a dysfunction of the endogenous opioid system (EOS) underlies the neurobiology of borderline personality disorder (BPD). In the present theoretical paper, based on a comprehensive database and hand search of the relevant literature, this hypothesis is extended to ASPD, which may be the predominant expression of EOS dysfunction in men, while the same pathology underlies BPD in women. According to evidence from human and animal studies, the problematic behaviours of persons with antisocial, callous, or psychopathic traits may be seen as desperate, unconscious attempts to stimulate their deficient EOS, which plays a key role in brain reward circuits. If the needs of this system are not being met, the affected persons experience dysphoric mood, discomfort, or irritability, and strive to increase binding of endogenous opioids to receptors by using the rewarding effects of aggression by exertion of physical or manipulative power on others, by abusing alcohol or substances that have the reward system as target, by creating an "endorphin rush" by self-harm, by increasing the frequency of their sexual contacts, or by impulsive actions and sensation seeking. Symptoms associated with ASPD can be treated with opioid antagonists like naltrexone, naloxone, or nalmefene.

Psychiatric disorders and violent reoffending: a national cohort study of convicted prisoners in Sweden

BACKGROUND

Reoffending and presence of psychiatric disorders are common in prisoners worldwide. However, whether psychiatric disorders are risk factors for reoffending is still unknown. We aimed to examine the association between psychiatric disorders, including substance use disorder, and violent reoffending.

METHODS

We did a longitudinal cohort study of 47,326 prisoners who were imprisoned since Jan 1, 2000, and released before Dec 31, 2009, in Sweden. We obtained data for diagnosed psychiatric disorders from both inpatient and outpatient registers, and sociodemographic and criminological factors from other population-based registers. We calculated hazard ratios (HRs) for violent reoffending with Cox regression. To control for potential familial confounding, we compared sibling prisoners with and without psychiatric disorders. We calculated population attributable fraction to assess the population effect.

FINDINGS

Diagnosed psychiatric disorders were associated with an increased hazard of violent reoffending in male (adjusted HR 1·63 [95% CI 1·57-1·70]) and female (2·02 [1·54-2·63]) prisoners, and these associations were independent of measured sociodemographic and criminological factors, and, in men, remained substantial after adjustment for unmeasured familial factors (2·01 [1·66-2·43]). However, findings differed between individual diagnoses and sex. We found some evidence of stronger effects on violent reoffending of alcohol and drug use disorders and bipolar disorder than of other psychiatric disorders. Alcohol use disorder seemed to have a greater effect in women than in men (women 2·08 [1·66-2·60]; men 1·63 [1·56-1·71]). The overall effects of psychiatric disorders did not differ with severity of crime. The hazard of violent reoffending increased in a stepwise way with the number of diagnosed psychiatric disorders. Assuming causality, up to 20% (95% CI 19-22) of violent reoffending in men and 40% (27-52) in women was attributable to the diagnosed psychiatric disorders that we investigated.

INTERPRETATION

Certain psychiatric disorders are associated with a substantially increased hazard of violent reoffending. Because these disorders are prevalent and mostly treatable, improvements to prison mental health services could counteract the cycle of reoffending and improve both public health and safety. National violence prevention strategies should consider the role of prison health.

FUNDING

Wellcome Trust, Swedish Research Council, and Swedish Research Council for Health, Working Life and Welfare.

Treatment of personality disorder

The evidence base for the effective treatment of personality disorders is insufficient. Most of the existing evidence on personality disorder is for the treatment of borderline personality disorder, but even this is limited by the small sample sizes and short follow-up in clinical trials, the wide range of core outcome measures used by studies, and poor control of coexisting psychopathology. Psychological or psychosocial intervention is recommended as the primary treatment for borderline personality disorder and pharmacotherapy is only advised as an adjunctive treatment. The amount of research about the underlying, abnormal, psychological or biological processes leading to the manifestation of a disordered personality is increasing, which could lead to more effective interventions. The synergistic or antagonistic interaction of psychotherapies and drugs for treating personality disorder should be studied in conjunction with their mechanisms of change throughout the development of each.

Antisocial behavioral syndromes and 3-year quality-of-life outcomes in United States adults

OBJECTIVE

To examine 3-year quality-of-life (QOL) outcomes among United States adults with Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders - Fourth Edition (DSM-IV) antisocial personality disorder (ASPD), syndromal adult antisocial behavior without conduct disorder (CD) before age 15 [adulthood antisocial behavioral syndrome (AABS), not a DSM-IV diagnosis], or no antisocial behavioral syndrome at baseline.

METHOD

Face-to-face interviews (n = 34 653). Psychiatric disorders were assessed using the Alcohol Use Disorder and Associated Disabilities Interview Schedule - DSM-IV Version. Health-related QOL was assessed using the Short-Form 12-Item Health Survey, version 2 (SF-12v2). Other outcomes included past-year Perceived Stress Scale-4 (PSS-4) scores, employment, receipt of Supplemental Security Income (SSI), welfare, and food stamps, and participation in social relationships.

RESULTS

Antisocial personality disorder and AABS predicted poorer employment, financial dependency, social relationship, and physical health outcomes. Relationships of antisociality to SSI and food stamp receipt and physical health scales were modified by baseline age. Both antisocial syndromes predicted higher PSS-4, AABS predicted lower SF-12v2 Vitality, and ASPD predicted lower SF-12v2 Social Functioning scores in women.

CONCLUSION

Similar prediction of QOL by ASPD and AABS suggests limited utility of requiring CD before age 15 to diagnose ASPD. Findings underscore the need to improve prevention and treatment of antisocial syndromes.

Chronic tiagabine administration and aggressive responding in individuals with a history of substance abuse and antisocial behavior

Anticonvulsants, notably those which modulate GABA activity, have shown efficacy in reducing aggressive behavior. Previously, we found dose-related decreases in human aggressive responding following acute tiagabine administration. Here, we examined the effects of chronic tiagabine over a 5-week period. Twelve individuals at increased risk for aggressive and violent behavior (currently on parole/probation with personality and/or substance use disorders) were randomly assigned to placebo (n = 6) or an escalating dose sequence of placebo, 4 mg, 8 mg, 12 mg, placebo (n = 6). Data were analyzed using both frequentist and Bayesian mixed models, evaluating aggressive behavior as a function of time, dose condition, and their interaction. For aggressive responding, there was a significant interaction of drug condition and time. Aggression in the tiagabine condition decreased for each additional week in the study, while participants in the placebo condition failed to demonstrate similar change over time. For monetary-reinforced responding, no drug or drug by time interactions were observed, suggesting specificity of drug effects on aggression. The small number of subjects limits the generality of the findings, and previous studies with tiagabine are limited to acute dosing and case report investigations. However, the present data provide an indication that tiagabine merits further examination as an agent for management of impulsive aggression.