PRO*BPD: effectiveness of outpatient treatment programs for borderline personality disorder: a comparison of Schema therapy and dialectical behavior therapy: study protocol for a randomized trial

The Effectiveness of Dialectical Behavior Therapy Compared to Schema Therapy for Borderline Personality Disorder: A Randomized Clinical Trial

INTRODUCTION

In the treatment of borderline personality disorder (BPD), there is empirical support for both dialectical behavior therapy (DBT) and schema therapy (ST); these treatments have never been compared directly. This study examines whether either of them is more effective than the other in treating patients with BPD.

METHODS

In this randomized, parallel-group, rater-blind clinical trial, outpatients aged between 18 and 65 years with a primary diagnosis of BPD were recruited in a tertiary outpatient treatment center (Lübeck, Germany). Participants were randomized to DBT or ST with one individual and one group session per week over 1.5 years. The primary outcome was the BPD symptom severity assessed with the mean score of the Borderline Personality Disorder Severity Index at 1-year naturalistic follow-up.

RESULTS

Between November 26, 2014, and December 14, 2018, we enrolled 164 patients (mean age = 33.7 [SD = 10.61] years). Of these, 81 (49.4%) were treated with ST and 83 (50.6%) with DBT, overall, 130 (79.3%) were female. Intention-to-treat analysis with generalized linear mixed models did not show a significant difference at 1-year naturalistic follow-up between DBT and ST for the BPDSI total score (mean difference 3.32 [95% CI: -0.58-7.22], p = 0.094, d = -24 [-0.69; 0.20]) with lower scores for DBT. Pre-to-follow-up effect sizes were large in both groups (DBT: d = 2.45 [1.88-3.02], ST: d = 1.78 [1.26-2.29]).

CONCLUSION

Patients in both treatment groups showed substantial improvements indicating that even severely affected patients with BPD and various comorbid disorders can be treated successfully with DBT and ST. An additional non-inferiority trial is needed to show if both treatments are equally effective. The trial was retrospectively registered on the German Clinical Trials Register, DRKS00011534 without protocol changes.

Group schema therapy for personality disorders: Systematic review, research agenda and treatment implications

OBJECTIVE

There are significant temporal and financial barriers for individuals with personality disorders (PD) receiving evidence-based psychological treatments. Emerging research indicates Group Schema Therapy (GST) may be an accessible, efficient, and cost-effective PD intervention, however, there has been no synthesis of the available evidence to date. This review therefore aimed to investigate the efficacy of GST for PDs by systematically synthesizing available literature.

METHOD

Five electronic databases were screened with resulting studies subjected to a specific eligibility criteria, which yielded fourteen relevant studies. Characteristics were extracted and methodological quality rigorously assessed.

RESULTS

Strong support was evidenced for GST's ability to reduce Cluster B and C symptomology, particularly for Borderline and Avoidant PD. GST appeared to improve global symptom severity, quality of life and functional capacity, as well as treatment targets such as schemas and modes.

CONCLUSION

Although not without limitations and a moderate risk of bias, the current body of evidence supports GST as a potential solution to current service deficits in economical and evidence-based care for individuals with PD. Implications for treatment and future research are discussed.

Addressing self-criticism in depression using CBT-based emotion-focused chairwork: study protocol of a randomised controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

Self-criticism is a key feature in people diagnosed with depression, resulting in significant psychological distress. Despite the fact that cognitive-behavioural treatments are readily available, a significant number of patients report experiencing cognitive, but not emotional, change following therapy, resulting in the maintenance of psychological symptoms. Additionally, interventions targeting emotional experiencing, such as chairwork, are generally implemented within large-scale therapeutic treatments. Therefore, within the present study, we aim to evaluate the efficacy and safety of a short intervention using emotion-focused chairwork to target self-criticism in patients diagnosed with depression.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

The study is designed as a randomised controlled trial with two parallel arms. 62 patients diagnosed with depression will be randomised to the intervention group or the waiting-list control group receiving treatment as usual. The intervention comprises of three treatment sessions using the chairwork technique over the course of 3 weeks. Outcome assessments will take place 1 week before the first treatment session, as well as 1 week and 3 months after the last treatment session. The primary outcomes are self-criticism and self-compassion. Secondary outcomes assess depressive symptoms, emotion regulation and overall self-esteem. Statistical analysis will be performed using intention-to-treat analysis, as well as per-protocol analysis implementing linear-mixed models.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The study was approved by the Ethics Committee of the State Chamber of Physicians in Baden-Wuerttemberg, Germany (approval number: F-2023-12). Scientific findings shall be published in peer-reviewed journals to inform prospective clinical studies focusing on the implementation of chairwork within clinical practice.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS00031307; https://drks.de/search/de/trial/DRKS00031307).

Chairwork in schema therapy for patients with borderline personality disorder-A qualitative study of patients' perceptions

Objective

Chairwork is one of the core experiential techniques of Schema Therapy (ST) which is used in the treatment of patients with borderline personality disorder (BPD). However, little is known about how people with BPD experience chairwork. The aim of this study was to explore the experiences of patients with BPD with chairwork in ST.

Method

Qualitative data were collected through semi-structured interviews with 29 participants with a primary diagnosis of BPD who experienced chairwork as part of their ST treatment. The interview data were analyzed using qualitative content analysis.

Findings

Many participants reported initial skepticism, and difficulties with engaging in chairwork. Specific therapist behaviors as well as some external (e.g., restricted facilities, noise) and internal factors (especially feeling ashamed or ridiculous) were named as hindering factors. Participants described several therapist behaviors facilitating chairwork such as providing safety, clear guidance through the process as well as flexible application of the technique according to their needs, and sufficient time for debriefing. Participants experienced emotional pain and exhaustion as short-term effects of the technique. All participants reported positive long-term effects including an improved understanding of their mode model as well as positive mode changes (e.g., less Punitive Parent and more Healthy Adult Mode), greater self-acceptance, improvements in coping with emotions and needs as well as improvements in interpersonal relationships.

Conclusions

Chairwork is experienced as an emotionally demanding but valuable technique. Based on the participants' statements, the delivery of chairwork can be optimized which can help to improve treatment outcome.

G-FORCE: the effectiveness of group psychotherapy for Cluster-C personality disorders: protocol of a pragmatic RCT comparing psychodynamic and two forms of schema group therapy

BACKGROUND

Cluster-C personality disorders (PDs), characterized by a high level of fear and anxiety, are related to high levels of distress, societal dysfunctioning and chronicity of various mental health disorders. Evidence for the optimal treatment is extremely scarce. Nevertheless, the need to treat these patients is eminent. In clinical practice, group therapy is one of the frequently offered approaches, with two important frameworks: schema therapy and psychodynamic therapy. These two frameworks suggest different mechanisms of change, but until now, this has not yet been explored. The purpose of the present G-FORCE trial is to find evidence on the differential (cost)effectiveness of two forms of schema group therapy and psychodynamic group therapy in the routine clinical setting of an outpatient clinic and to investigate the underlying working mechanisms and predictors of outcome of these therapies.

METHODS

In this mono-centre pragmatic randomized clinical trial, 290 patients with Cluster-C PDs or other specified PD with predominantly Cluster-C traits, will be randomized to one of three treatment conditions: group schema therapy for Cluster-C (GST-C, 1 year), schema-focused group therapy (SFGT, 1.5 year) or psychodynamic group therapy (PG, 2 years). Randomization will be pre-stratified on the type of PD. Change in severity of PD (APD-IV) over 24 months will be the primary outcome measure. Secondary outcome measures are personality functioning, psychiatric symptoms and quality of life. Potential predictors and mediators are selected and measured repeatedly. Also, a cost-effectiveness study will be performed, primarily based on a societal perspective, using both clinical effects and quality-adjusted life years. The time-points of assessment are at baseline, start of treatment and after 1, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24 and 36 months.

DISCUSSION

This study is designed to evaluate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of three formats of group psychotherapy for Cluster-C PDs. Additionally, predictors, procedure and process variables are analysed to investigate the working mechanisms of the therapies. This is the first large RCT on group therapy for Cluster-C PDs and will contribute improving the care of this neglected patient group. The absence of a control group can be considered as a limitation.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

CCMO, NL72826.029.20 . Registered on 31 August 2020, first participant included on 18 October 2020.

Individual psychotherapy for cluster-C personality disorders: protocol of a pragmatic RCT comparing short-term psychodynamic supportive psychotherapy, affect phobia therapy and schema therapy (I-FORCE)

BACKGROUND

Cluster-C personality disorders (PDs) are highly prevalent in clinical practice and are associated with unfavourable outcome and chronicity of all common mental health disorders (e.g. depression and anxiety disorders). Although several forms of individual psychotherapy are commonly offered in clinical practice for this population, evidence for differential effectiveness of different forms of psychotherapy is lacking. Also, very little is known about the underlying working mechanisms of these psychotherapies. Finding evidence on the differential (cost)-effectiveness for this group of patients and the working mechanisms of change is important to improve the quality of care for this vulnerable group of patients.

OBJECTIVE

In this study, we will compare the differential (cost)-effectiveness of three individual psychotherapies: short-term psychodynamic supportive psychotherapy (SPSP), affect phobia therapy (APT) and schema therapy (ST). Although these psychotherapies are commonly used in clinical practice, evidence for the Cluster-C PDs is limited. Additionally, we will investigate predictive factors, non-specific and therapy-specific mediators.

METHODS

This is a mono-centre randomized clinical trial with three parallel groups: (1) SPSP, (2) APT, (3) ST. Randomization on patient level will be pre-stratified according to type of PD. The total study population to be included consists of 264 patients with Cluster-C PDs or other specified PD with mainly Cluster-C traits, aged 18-65 years, seeking treatment at NPI, a Dutch mental health care institute specialized in PDs. SPSP, APT and ST (50 sessions per treatment) are offered twice a week in sessions of 50 min for the first 4 to 5 months. After that, session frequency decreases to once a week. All treatments have a maximum duration of 1 year. Change in the severity of the PD (ADP-IV) will be the primary outcome measure. Secondary outcome measures are personality functioning, psychiatric symptoms and quality of life. Several potential mediators, predictors and moderators of outcome are also assessed. The effectiveness study is complemented with a cost-effectiveness/utility study, using both clinical effects and quality-adjusted life-years, and primarily based on a societal approach. Assessments will take place at baseline, start of treatment and at 1, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24 and 36 months.

DISCUSSION

This is the first study comparing psychodynamic treatment to schema therapy for Cluster-C PDs. The naturalistic design enhances the clinical validity of the outcome. A limitation is the lack of a control group for ethical reasons.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NL72823.029.20 [Registry ID: CCMO]. Registered on 31 August 2020. First participant included on 23 October 2020.

A Systematic Review of the Heterogeneity of Schema Therapy

We aimed to explore the heterogeneity of schema therapy regarding (a) patient characteristics, (b) content, and (c) way of delivering schema therapy. A search was conducted of the electronic databases EMBASE, PsycINFO, Web of Science, MEDLINE, and COCHRANE up to June 15, 2022. Treatment studies were eligible if they (a) used schema therapy as (component of) the intervention examined, and (b) reported an outcome measure quantitatively. A total of 101 studies met the inclusion criteria, including randomized controlled trials (n = 30), non-randomized controlled trials (n = 8), pre-post designs (n = 22), cases series (n = 13), and case reports (n = 28), including 4006 patients. Good feasibility was consistently reported irrespective of format (group versus individual), setting (outpatient, day-treatment, inpatient), intensity of treatment, and the specific therapeutic components included. Schema therapy was applied to various (psychiatric) disorders. All studies presented promising results. Effectiveness of the different models of schema therapy as well as application beyond personality disorders should be examined more rigorously.

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.

The societal cost of treatment-seeking patients with borderline personality disorder in Germany

According to previous research, borderline personality disorder (BPD) is associated with high cost-of-illness. However, there is still a shortage of cost-of-illness-studies assessing costs from a broad societal perspective, including direct and indirect costs. Further, there are considerable differences in the results among the existing studies. In the present study, 167 German men and women seeking specialized outpatient treatment for BPD were included. We assessed societal cost-of-illness bottom-up through structured face-to-face interviews and encompassed a wide range of cost components. All costs were calculated for the 2015 price level. Cost-of-illness amounted to € 31,130 per patient and year preceding disorder-specific outpatient treatment. € 17,044 (54.8%) were direct costs that were mostly related to hospital treatment. Indirect costs amounted to € 14,086 (45.2%). Within indirect costs, costs related to work disability were the most crucial cost driver. The present study underlines the tremendous economic burden of BPD. According to the present study, both the direct and indirect costs are of significant importance for the societal costs associated with BPD. Besides the need for more disorder-specific treatment facilities for men and women with BPD, we assume that education and employment are topics that should be specifically targeted and individually supported at an early stage of treatment.Trial Registration: German Clinical Trial Registration, DRKS00011534, Date of Registration: 11/01/2017, retrospectively registered.

Towards optimal treatment selection for borderline personality disorder patients (BOOTS): a study protocol for a multicenter randomized clinical trial comparing schema therapy and dialectical behavior therapy

BACKGROUND

Specialized evidence-based treatments have been developed and evaluated for borderline personality disorder (BPD), including Dialectical Behavior Therapy (DBT) and Schema Therapy (ST). Individual differences in treatment response to both ST and DBT have been observed across studies, but the factors driving these differences are largely unknown. Understanding which treatment works best for whom and why remain central issues in psychotherapy research. The aim of the present study is to improve treatment response of DBT and ST for BPD patients by a) identifying patient characteristics that predict (differential) treatment response (i.e., treatment selection) and b) understanding how both treatments lead to change (i.e., mechanisms of change). Moreover, the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of DBT and ST will be evaluated.

METHODS

The BOOTS trial is a multicenter randomized clinical trial conducted in a routine clinical setting in several outpatient clinics in the Netherlands. We aim to recruit 200 participants, to be randomized to DBT or ST. Patients receive a combined program of individual and group sessions for a maximum duration of 25 months. Data are collected at baseline until three-year follow-up. Candidate predictors of (differential) treatment response have been selected based on the literature, a patient representative of the Borderline Foundation of the Netherlands, and semi-structured interviews among 18 expert clinicians. In addition, BPD-treatment-specific (ST: beliefs and schema modes; DBT: emotion regulation and skills use), BPD-treatment-generic (therapeutic environment characterized by genuineness, safety, and equality), and non-specific (attachment and therapeutic alliance) mechanisms of change are assessed. The primary outcome measure is change in BPD manifestations. Secondary outcome measures include functioning, additional self-reported symptoms, and well-being.

DISCUSSION

The current study contributes to the optimization of treatments for BPD patients by extending our knowledge on "Which treatment - DBT or ST - works the best for which BPD patient, and why?", which is likely to yield important benefits for both BPD patients (e.g., prevention of overtreatment and potential harm of treatments) and society (e.g., increased economic productivity of patients and efficient use of treatments).

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Netherlands Trial Register, NL7699 , registered 25/04/2019 - retrospectively registered.

A Narrative Review on Dialectical Behavior Therapy for Patients with Depressive Difficulties

Background:

Dialectical behavior therapy (DBT) is a type of cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) that was earlier intended to treat only patients with borderline personality disorder (BPD), but researchers have found DBT to treat several psychological disorders, including depression.

Aim:

The article aims to review the clinical shreds of evidence regarding the use of DBT to treat depression.

Methods:

PubMed literature search was done by applying the year filter range, 2010 to 2021. Another filter applied was "Randomized controlled trial", so that the strength of evidence could be enhanced. The keywords used were "Dialectical Behavior Therapy" AND "Depression

Results:

33 articles were found, out of which only 20 relevant articles were reviewed. DBT was found to alleviate depressive symptoms associated with different psychological disorders like bipolar disorder and BPD but the number of studies that validated the afore-mentioned were less than those studies which showed that DBT had no significant effect on the patients with depressive difficulties. The long-term effect of DBT for treating depression is under a suspect, as studies showed DBT got ineffective during the follow-ups

Conclusion:

DBT shows benefits in depression but further studies are still required to validate this concretely as DBT did not show a significant effect when compared to its control counterparts. There is much need for future studies which can evaluate the long-term efficacy of DBT in depression is another challenging area because follow-up data did not favor DBT.

Measurement Instruments of Productivity Loss of Paid and Unpaid Work: A Systematic Review and Assessment of Suitability for Health Economic Evaluations From a Societal Perspective

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed (1) to perform a systematic literature review of instruments for measuring productivity loss of paid and unpaid work and (2) to assess the suitability (in terms of identification, measurement, and valuation) of these instruments for use in health economic evaluations from a societal perspective.

METHODS

Articles published from 2018 were sourced from PubMed/Medline, PsycInfo, Embase, and Econlit. Using 2 separate search strategies, eligible economic evaluations and validation studies were selected and unique measurement instruments identified. A data-extraction form was developed by studying previous literature and consulting an international panel of experts in the field of productivity costs. This data-extraction form was applied to assess the suitability of instruments for use in economic evaluations.

RESULTS

A total of 5982 articles were retrieved from the databases, of which 99 economic evaluations and 9 validation studies were included in the review. A total of 42 unique measurement instruments were identified. Nine instruments provided quantified measures of absenteeism, presenteeism, and unpaid work. Five instruments supplied the necessary information to enable the use of at least 1 common valuation method. The Health and Labour Questionnaire-Short Form, Health and Labour Questionnaire, and Institute for Medical Technology Assessment Productivity Cost Questionnaire met both criteria. Nevertheless, the developers replaced the Health and Labour Questionnaire-Short Form and Health and Labour Questionnaire by the more recently developed Institute for Medical Technology Assessment Productivity Cost Questionnaire.

CONCLUSIONS

Although many instruments for measuring productivity loss were identified, most were not suitable for capturing productivity changes for economic evaluations from a societal perspective. Future research can benefit from this study by making an informed instrument choice for the measurement of productivity loss of paid and unpaid work.

How do patients with borderline personality disorder experience Distress Tolerance Skills in the context of dialectical behavioral therapy?-A qualitative study

Distress Tolerance Skills (DTS) are an important component of Dialectical Behavioral Therapy (DBT), a therapy method frequently used for treating patients with Borderline Personality Disorder (BPD). However, little is known about how DTS-training is experienced by individuals with BPD. The aim of this study was to explore BPD patients’ experiences with receiving DTS-training. Qualitative data were collected through semi-structured interviews with 24 individuals (87.5% females) with a primary diagnosis of BPD who received DTS-training in the context of 18 months of DBT treatment. Interview data were analyzed following the procedures of qualitative content analysis. Participants reported various effects of DTS including an immediate reduction of tension. Patients perceived DTS as a tool to cope with difficult interpersonal situations and emergencies and stated that this helped them to feel stable, safe and self-confident. Patients reported difficulties during the initial engagement, the learning process and the application of DTS as well as various facilitating factors. Implications of the findings for further research and for optimizing DTS-training in clinical practice are discussed.

The mediating effect of difficulties in emotion regulation on the association between childhood maltreatment and borderline personality disorder

BACKGROUND

Childhood maltreatment and difficulties in emotion regulation are common in patients with Borderline Personality Disorder (BPD) and Depressive Disorders (DD).

OBJECTIVE

This study examines differences between patients with BPD and patients with DD, regarding childhood maltreatment and difficulties in emotion regulation as well as the mediating effect of different aspects of emotion regulation deficits on the association between childhood maltreatment and BPD-symptoms.

METHOD

A total of 305 participants, 177 with BPD and 128 with DD completed an assessment including the Childhood Trauma Questionnaire (CTQ), the Emotion Regulation Scale (DERS), the Brief Symptom Inventory (BSI), and the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV (SCID). Data was analyzed using multiple analyses of variances and mediation analyses.

RESULTS

Patients with BPD reported more childhood maltreatment and more difficulties in emotion regulation than patients with DD. When general symptom severity, age, and gender were included in the analysis as covariates only group differences regarding 'impulse control difficulties' (F(1,299) = 38.97, p < .001, η_p² = .115), 'limited access to emotion regulation strategies' (F(1,299) = 4.66, p = .032, η_p² = .015), and 'lack of emotional clarity' (F(1,299) = 9.38, p = .002, η_p² = .030) remained statistically significant. A mediation analysis, including above-mentioned covariates, indicated an association between emotional abuse and BPD-symptoms, which was mediated by difficulties in emotion regulation (indirect effect B = .012, 95% CI [.001; .031], R² = .429). Subscale analyses revealed 'impulse control difficulties' as the aspect of difficulties in emotion regulation that has the greatest impact on this association (B = .021, 95% CI [.003; .045]).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with BPD display more childhood maltreatment and difficulties in emotion regulation than patients with DD. Difficulties in emotion regulation, especially difficulties in impulse control, seem to play an important role in the association between childhood emotional abuse and BPD-symptoms.

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.

Experiences of Patients With Borderline Personality Disorder With Imagery Rescripting in the Context of Schema Therapy-A Qualitative Study

Imagery Rescripting (IR) is a therapeutic technique that is used in a wide spectrum of therapeutic methods for various mental disorders. As an important component of Schema Therapy (ST), IR is frequently used in the treatment of patients with borderline personality disorder (BPD). However, little is known about how IR is experienced by individuals with BPD. The aim of this study was to explore BPD patients' experiences with receiving IR. Qualitative data were collected through semi-structured interviews with 21 individuals (86% females) with a primary diagnosis of BPD who received IR within their ST treatment. Interview data were analyzed following the procedures of qualitative content analysis. Participants reported various effects of IR including initial high emotionality and exhaustion. Long-term effects included a better understanding of schemas and an improvement regarding emotion regulation and interpersonal relationships. Participants reported factors hindering the successful implementation of IR, such as external noise, stress, and a fast pace during IR. Facilitating factors included adequate time for debriefing, a transparent structure, and preparation of IR as well as the therapist providing safety. Implications of the findings for optimizing IR in clinical practice are discussed.