Dangerous severe personality disorder--bad tidings from the UK

AUD in perspective

Alcohol is a major cause of pre-mature death and individual suffering worldwide, and the importance of diagnosing and treating AUD cannot be overstated. Given the global burden and the high attributable factor of alcohol in a vast number of diseases, the need for additional interventions and the development of new medicines is considered a priority by the World Health Organization (WHO). As of today, AUD is severely under-treated with a treatment gap nearing 90%, strikingly higher than that for other psychiatric disorders. Patients often seek treatment late in the progress of the disease and even among those who seek treatment only a minority receive medication, mirroring the still-prevailing stigma of the disease, and a lack of access to effective treatments, as well as a reluctance to total abstinence. To increase adherence, treatment goals should focus not only on maintaining abstinence, but also on harm reduction and psychosocial functioning. A personalised approach to AUD treatment, with a holistic view, and tailored therapy has the potential to improve AUD treatment outcomes by targeting the heterogeneity in genetics and pathophysiology, as well as reason for, and reaction to drinking. Also, the psychiatric co-morbidity rates are high in AUD and dual diagnosis can worsen symptoms and influence treatment response and should be considered in the treatment strategies.

The severity of psychiatric disorders

The issue of the severity of psychiatric disorders has great clinical importance. For example, severity influences decisions about level of care, and affects decisions to seek government assistance due to psychiatric disability. Controversy exists as to the efficacy of antidepressants across the spectrum of depression severity, and whether patients with severe depression should be preferentially treated with medication rather than psychotherapy. Measures of severity are used to evaluate outcome in treatment studies and may be used as meaningful endpoints in clinical practice. But, what does it mean to say that someone has a severe illness? Does severity refer to the number of symptoms a patient is experiencing? To the intensity of the symptoms? To symptom frequency or persistence? To the impact of symptoms on functioning or on quality of life? To the likelihood of the illness resulting in permanent disability or death? Putting aside the issue of how severity should be operationalized, another consideration is whether severity should be conceptualized similarly for all illnesses or be disorder specific. In this paper, we examine how severity is characterized in research and contemporary psychiatric diagnostic systems, with a special focus on depression and personality disorders. Our review shows that the DSM-5 has defined the severity of various disorders in different ways, and that researchers have adopted a myriad of ways of defining severity for both depression and personality disorders, although the severity of the former was predominantly defined according to scores on symptom rating scales, whereas the severity of the latter was often linked with impairments in functioning. Because the functional impact of symptom-defined disorders depends on factors extrinsic to those disorders, such as self-efficacy, resilience, coping ability, social support, cultural and social expectations, as well as the responsibilities related to one's primary role function and the availability of others to assume those responsibilities, we argue that the severity of such disorders should be defined independently from functional impairment.

Nalmefene in Alcohol Use Disorder Subjects with Psychiatric Comorbidity: A Naturalistic Study

INTRODUCTION

Nalmefene is the first drug to be approved for reducing alcohol consumption in alcohol use disorder (AUD) patients at high drinking risk. In real-world settings, there is a high prevalence of concurrent psychiatric disorders in AUD subjects, with associated increased morbidity and worse prognosis. This study evaluated the use of nalmefene in AUD patients with stabilized psychiatric comorbidity previously treated unsuccessfully for alcohol dependence, and assessed craving reduction and safety.

METHODS

Sixty-five AUD outpatients treated with as-needed 18 mg nalmefene for 24 weeks were included. Primary outcome measures were: changes in heavy drinking days (HDDs) and total alcohol consumption (TAC, g/day). Secondary outcome measures were: changes in drinking risk level and craving (obsessive-compulsive drinking scale and visual analogue scale for craving).

RESULTS

Forty-two AUD subjects (64.6%) had one or more stabilized psychiatric comorbidity. There was a significant reduction in HDDs, TAC and craving measures (p < 0.001), with no differences between subjects with and without psychiatric comorbidity. Nalmefene was safe and well tolerated in all patients.

CONCLUSION

As-needed nalmefene reduced drinking and craving in AUD subjects with and without psychiatric comorbidity. These findings suggest that nalmefene is a valid therapeutic option in real-world clinical settings, where comorbid conditions are common, and has the potential to engage AUD patients who may otherwise not have sought help.

FUNDING

Lundbeck Italia S.P.A.

Clinical and economic outcomes from the UK pilot psychiatric services for personality-disordered offenders

Personality-disordered offenders are difficult individuals to manage, and knowledge about effective treatment is sparse. In the UK, novel forensic psychiatric services were recently established for the treatment of offenders with personality disorder. In this paper we report the clinical and economic findings from a 2-year follow-up of a cohort of service users recruited from these services. Baseline information on developmental, clinical and offending histories was obtained from case records. Case records were checked at 6 and 24 months for new episodes of self-harm, violence, alcohol and substance use, and offending behaviour. Ratings of social functioning and therapeutic alliance were obtained from service users at baseline, 6 and 24 months. Fifty-six percent of service users were still engaged with the services at 24-month follow-up. Service users involved in the greatest number of behavioural incidents had greater impairment in baseline social functioning and lower IQ scores. There was no significant change in either therapeutic alliance or social functioning at 6 or 24 months. The economic analysis showed that although the services were predominantly run by the Health Service, there were considerable economic burdens shared by other service providers. Treatment costs at six-month follow-up were also significantly higher. Implications are discussed.

Perceptions of diagnostic labels in forensic psychiatric practice: a survey of differences between nurses and other disciplines

This paper reports on a study of nurses' and non-nurses' perceptions of labels of mental illness and personality disorder in forensic services in the UK. The objectives of the study were to establish if differences in perceptions existed within, and between, the two groups of professionals. The research method was a survey design with 1,200 questionnaires distributed to nurses and 300 to other professionals in disciplines on forensic units in the UK, with response rates of 34.6% and 43%, respectively. The target population included clinical health care staff who had patient contact, including nurses, psychiatrists, psychologists, social workers, and occupational therapists. The results indicate that there are statistically significant differences within both nursing and non-nursing groups and also between the groups in relation to a "management" perspective for individuals labelled with a personality disorder and a "clinical" focus for individuals who are labelled as mentally ill. This paper adds research into the arena of forensic mental health in relation to the diagnostic labels of mental illness and personality disorders. It also adds evidence of a clinical response or a management response to such diagnostic labels which may impact on the practice of forensic psychiatry.

The successes and failures of the DSPD experiment: the assessment and management of severe personality disorder

In the last 10 years a sum in excess of 200 million pound has been spent in developing a new programme of treatment for those deemed to have dangerous and severe personality disorder (DSPD) in England. This proto-diagnosis is a new concept in forensic psychiatric practice and, although its conception was bold, it carried considerable risks in implementation as so little was known about the effective management of this group of disorders. We review the successes and failures of this pioneering programme a decade after its introduction and conclude that although much has been gained from the experiment--particularly in developing services for those with personality disorder in general--it has been less effective in managing those whom it was primarily targeting and may not have been cost-effective.

An agitation of contrary opinions

Those people who are dangerous often have personality disorders. Should these individuals be dealt with by criminal justice or mental health services? England (note not Scotland) has taken the mental health route with the Dangerous and Severe Personality Disorder Programme. Is this bold move wise or foolish? To answer this question we have both evidence and opinion - neither is conclusive.

Temporal reliability of psychological assessments for patients in a special hospital with severe personality disorder: a preliminary note

BACKGROUND

The new programme for assessing those with dangerous and severe personality disorder relies heavily on psychological assessments of personality disorder and risk.

METHODS

The temporal reliability of assessments of psychopathy (PCL-R), risk (HCR-20) and personality was assessed using the International Personality Disorder Examination (IPDE) in 15 randomly selected male prisoners in a high secure hospital carried out at intervals varying between a mean of nine and 19 months after initial assessments by a variety of assessors.

RESULTS

Using the intra-class correlation coefficient the agreement varied between 0.57 (HCR-20), 0.58 (PCL-R) and 0.38-0.70 for IPDE personality disorders, with the best agreement for antisocial personality disorder (0.70).

COMMENT

These levels of agreement are consistent with other recent work on temporal reliability of personality instruments but are a little too low for confidence in these measures alone in the assessment process.

Neurobiological substrates of antisocial and borderline personality disorder: preliminary results of a functional fMRI study

BACKGROUND

Neuropsychological and imaging studies of patients with antisocial (ASPD) and borderline personality disorder (BPD) are suggestive of frontal lobe dysfunction in these individuals. In normal subjects functional brain imaging has been used to investigate the neuroanatomy of impulse control. There are no such imaging studies in personality-disordered populations.

AIM

This study aimed to investigate which neuronal networks are involved in response inhibition in Cluster B personality disorders and whether these are different from healthy subjects.

HYPOTHESIS

We hypothesized that the personality-disordered sample would have attenuated orbitofrontal cortex responses during performance of a Go/NoGo task compared with healthy controls.

METHOD

Eight inpatients with a DSM-IV diagnosis of borderline or antisocial personality disorder and eight healthy controls were scanned using fMRI while performing a Go/NoGo task. Impulsivity was assessed using the Barratt Impulsivity Scale (BIS) and the Impulsiveness-Venturesomeness-Empathy (IVE) inventory.

RESULTS

In the control group the main focus of activation during response inhibition was in the prefrontal cortex, specifically the right dorsolateral and the left orbitofrontal cortex. Active regions in the patient group showed a more bilateral and extended pattern of activation across the medial, superior and inferior frontal gyri extending to the anterior cingulate.

CONCLUSIONS

fMRI is a useful tool to detect brain activation during response inhibition. ASPD and BPD patients activate different neural networks to successfully inhibit pre-potent responses.