Therapeutic interventions in Australian primary care, youth mental health settings for young people with borderline personality disorder or borderline traits

Diagnosing borderline personality disorder: Reports and recommendations from people with lived experience

Borderline personality disorder (BPD) is a severe mental health condition marked by impairments in self and interpersonal functioning. Stigma from health staff may often result in a reluctance to diagnose, impacting recovery trajectories. Qualitative interviews were conducted with participants (N = 15; M Age = 36.4 years, SD = 7.5; 93.3% female) with lived experience of BPD exploring topics of illness onset, insight, experience of diagnosis and treatment. Qualitative responses were analysed within a co-design framework with a member of the research team who identifies as having a lived experience of BPD. On average, participant symptoms emerged at 12.1 years of age (SD = 6.6 years, range 1.5-27), but diagnoses of BPD were delayed until 30.2 years (SD = 7.8 years, range 18-44) resulting in a 'diagnosis gap' of 18.1 years (SD = 9.6 years, range 3-30). Participant explanations for BPD emergence varied from biological, psychological and social factors. Benefits of diagnosis (e.g., fostering insight, aiding treatment planning and reducing isolation) were contrasted with challenges (e.g., stigma and treatment unavailability). Delay in diagnosis was common, and no participants reported receiving a diagnosis of BPD during their adolescence yet 85% felt they would have benefited from a diagnosis in adolescence. Only a quarter (27%) felt highly supported in the diagnostic process. An ideal four-step diagnosis procedure was outlined based on recommendations from participants with a lived experience; this involved the following: (1) explain the process, (2) assess thoroughly, (3) explore how the features are active in everyday life and (4) link diagnosis to evidence-based treatment planning.

The (cost-)effectiveness of early intervention (MBT-early) versus standard protocolized treatment (CBT) for emerging borderline personality disorder in adolescents (the EARLY study): a study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Although clinical guidelines prioritize the treatment of depression and anxiety in young persons, there is accumulating evidence that the presence of symptoms of borderline personality disorder (BPD) is associated with the limited effectiveness of these standard treatments. These findings stress the need for interventions addressing early-stage BPD in young people with presenting symptoms of anxiety and depressive disorders. The aim of this study is to investigate the (cost-)effectiveness of an early intervention programme for BPD (MBT-early) compared to first-choice psychological treatment for depression and anxiety according to Dutch treatment guidelines (CBT), in adolescents with either depression, anxiety, or both, in combination with early-stage BPD.

METHODS

This study is a multi-centre randomized controlled trial. A total of 132 adolescents, presenting with either depression, anxiety, or both and significant BPD features will be randomized to either MBT-early or CBT. The severity of BPD, symptoms of depression and anxiety, personality, social and academic functioning, and quality of life will be assessed at baseline, end of treatment, and at 12-, 18-, and 24-month follow-up, along with medical costs and costs of productivity losses for cost-effectiveness analyses.

DISCUSSION

This study will provide an empirical evaluation of the potential surplus value of early intervention in young people for whom treatment oriented at common mental disorders like anxiety and depression may be insufficient given their underlying personality problems.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Netherlands Trial Register, NL9569. Registered on June 15, 2021.

The effectiveness of a day hospital mentalization-based therapy programme for adolescents with borderline personality traits: Findings from Touchstone-Child and Adolescent Mental Health Service

BACKGROUND

Individuals with borderline personality disorder (BPD) are at a substantial risk of harm to themselves and others, experience high levels of functional impairment and typically are high users of tertiary healthcare to address their mental health concerns. As indicators for BPD typically emerge in adolescence, a day therapy service in Bentley, Western Australia, Touchstone Child and Adolescent Mental Health Service (CAMHS), was developed as an intensive intervention for adolescents with indicators for BPD and its associated symptomology. Touchstone utilizes mentalization-based therapy (MBT) in a therapeutic community setting, where the current study sought to document the anecdotal outcomes using the data provided at Touchstone, to enable a greater understanding of this treatment approach for adolescents with indicators for BPD.

METHOD

Forty-six participants attended the Touchstone programme between 2015 and 2020. The programme involved 6 months of MBT (group and individual), occupational therapy, education and creative therapies. Measures of self-injury, mood and emergency department presentations were collected pre- and post-programme.

RESULTS

Results indicate that participants show a reduction in non-suicidal acts and thoughts, as well as a reduction in negative moods and feelings from pre-Touchstone to post-Touchstone. There is also a decrease in participant presentation to tertiary emergency departments for mental health concerns.

CONCLUSIONS

The current study shows evidence for the efficacy of Touchstone as an MBT therapeutic community intervention to reduce symptoms of emerging BPD and effectively reduce presentations to emergency departments for mental health presentations, alleviating pressure on tertiary hospitals and reducing economic impact of adolescents within this demographic.

Bringing personality disorder in from the cold: Why personality disorder is a fundamental concern for youth mental health

OBJECTIVE

Personality disorder (PD) has its peak incidence between puberty and young adulthood. By any measure, it is among the most severe mental health problems occurring in young people, uniquely predicting debilitating current problems and acting as a 'gateway' to diverse and serious future problems. Yet, PD still struggles for legitimacy and parity of access to services, including early intervention.

CONCLUSION

Addressing PD is fundamental to youth mental health, and early intervention for PD has reached 'proof of concept'. Yet, reform is hindered by bigotry and sectarianism. Successful early intervention calls for a shift in the culture of services, countering damaging myths, addressing bigotry, and fostering hope. Such reforms are well within the reach of youth mental health.

The diagnosis that should speak its name: why it is ethically right to diagnose and treat personality disorder during adolescence

Although national guidelines explicitly state that personality disorder can be diagnosed and treated in young people aged 12 to 18 years (adolescents), most clinicians remain hesitant. This creates a gap between science and practice, which we argue is largely motivated by moral reasons and, therefore, is best challenged by ethical arguments. We provide seven arguments in support of the notion that it is ethically right to diagnose and treat personality disorder when it occurs in adolescents. Central to these arguments is the scientific evidence that features of personality disorder are among the best predictors of a complex cluster of psychopathology leading to impairments in many areas of current and future mental, social and vocational functioning. We argue that intervention during adolescence and young adulthood is not only humane, but also critical for efforts to avert the longstanding psychosocial and health problems that seem refractory to treatment in adults with personality disorder. Moreover, we argue that regular services are often inadequately equipped to meet the needs of young people with personality disorder and that the common 'stepped-care' approach should be replaced by a 'staged-care' approach. Finally, we argue that early detection and intervention might have anti-stigmatizing effects, similar to other areas of healthcare in which stigmatizing labels have changed meaning when the conditions to which they refer have become more amenable to treatment.

Adolescent borderline personality disorder: Does early intervention 'bend the curve'?

OBJECTIVE

The Global Alliance for Prevention and Early Intervention for Borderline Personality Disorder (BPD) proposed a major change for youth mental health services. The Alliance recommended that early detection and specialised treatment for youth BPD becomes a major focus of their clinical activities. Since structured psychotherapies for BPD are complex and lengthy, this proposal has significant implications for youth policy, planning and resource allocation. Our commentary addresses whether BPD is diagnosable and treatable in youth, and whether early intervention results in longer-term benefits.

CONCLUSION

People diagnosed with BPD are highly heterogeneous and experience high levels of comorbidity. The low quality of the evidence for the treatment of BPD in adolescence limits our ability to develop evidence-based guidelines. Accordingly, there is no clear case for BPD early intervention as a major component of youth mental health services. The introduction of ICD-11 classification system may facilitate further empirical studies of personality disorders in adolescence and emerging adulthood.

Early Intervention for Personality Disorder

Both the DSM-5 Section III Alternative Model for Personality Disorders and the ICD-11 have introduced a genuinely developmental approach to personality disorder. Among young people with personality disorder, compelling evidence demonstrates a high burden of disease, substantial morbidity, and premature mortality, as well as response to treatment. Yet, early diagnosis and treatment for the disorder have struggled to emerge from its identity as a controversial diagnosis to a mainstream focus for mental health services. Key reasons for this include stigma and discrimination, lack of knowledge about and failure to identify personality disorder among young people, along with the belief that personality disorder must always be addressed through lengthy and specialized individual psychotherapy programs. In fact, evidence suggests that early intervention for personality disorder should be a focus for all mental health clinicians who see young people and is feasible by using widely available clinical skills.

Five Failures and Five Challenges for Prevention and Early Intervention for Personality Disorder

Despite global consensus regarding the early detection of personality disorder, current approaches to early intervention have failed to deliver for the majority of young people. This only serves to reinforce the enduring effects of personality disorder on functioning, mental and physical health, resulting in a reduction of quality of life and life expectancy. Here, we describe five significant challenges facing prevention and early intervention for personality disorder: identification, access to treatment, research translation, innovation and functional recovery. These challenges highlight the need for early intervention to shift from niche programmes in specialist services for a select few young people to become established in mainstream primary care and specialist youth mental health services. Reprinted from Curr Opin Psychol 2021; 37:134-138, with permission from Elsevier. Copyright © 2021.

Effect of 3 Forms of Early Intervention for Young People With Borderline Personality Disorder: The MOBY Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

Clinical trials have neither focused on early intervention for psychosocial impairment nor on the contribution of components of borderline personality disorder (BPD) treatment beyond individual psychotherapy.

Objective

To evaluate the effectiveness of 3 early interventions for BPD of differing complexity.

Design, Settings, and Participants

This single-blinded randomized clinical trial recruited young people between March 17, 2011, and September 30, 2015, into parallel groups. The study took place at 2 government-funded mental health services for young people in Melbourne, Australia. Inclusion criteria were age 15 to 25 years (inclusive), recent DSM-IV-TR BPD diagnosis, and never receiving evidence-based BPD treatment. A total of 139 participants were randomized (pool of 876; 70 declined, 667 excluded), balanced for sex, age, and depressive symptomatology. Data analysis completed May 2020.

Interventions

(1) The Helping Young People Early (HYPE) dedicated BPD service model for young people, combined with weekly cognitive analytic therapy (CAT); (2) HYPE combined with a weekly befriending psychotherapy control condition; and (3) a general youth mental health service (YMHS) model, combined with befriending. Therefore, the 3 treatment arms were HYPE + CAT, HYPE + befriending, and YMHS + befriending. Participants were randomly assigned both to 1 treatment arm (in a 1:1:1 ratio) and to a clinician.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Psychosocial functioning, measured with the Inventory of Interpersonal Problems Circumplex Version and the Social Adjustment Scale Self-report.

Results

One hundred twenty-eight participants (104 [81.3%] were female; mean [SD] age, 19.1 [2.8] years; HYPE + CAT: 40 [31.3%]; HYPE + befriending: 45 [35.2%]; YMHS + befriending: 43 [33.6%]) who provided postbaseline data were included in the intent-to-treat analysis. Regardless of group, from baseline to 12 months, there was a mean of 19.3% to 23.8% improvement in the primary outcomes and 40.7% to 52.7% for all secondary outcomes, except severity of substance use and client satisfaction. The latter remained high across all time points. Planned comparisons (YMHS + befriending vs HYPE; HYPE + CAT vs befriending) showed that neither the service model nor the psychotherapy intervention was associated with a superior rate of change in psychosocial functioning by the 12-month primary end point. The HYPE service model was superior to YMHS + befriending for treatment attendance (median [IQR], 22 [19] vs 3 [16] contacts; median duration, 200 [139.5] vs 94 [125] days) and treatment completion (44 of 92 [47.8%] vs 9 of 47 [19.2%]). HYPE + CAT was superior to befriending for treatment attendance (median [IQR], 12 [16.5] vs 3 [9.8] sessions) and treatment completion (24 of 46 [52.2%] vs 29 of 93 [31.2%]).

Conclusions and Relevance

In this randomized clinical trial of 3 interventions for young people with BPD, effective early intervention was not reliant on availability of specialist psychotherapy but did require youth-oriented clinical case management and psychiatric care. A dedicated early intervention BPD service model (HYPE), with or without individual psychotherapy, achieved greater treatment attendance and completion, making it more likely to meet service user, family, and community expectations of care.

Trial Registration

anzctr.org.au Identifier: ACTRN12610000100099.

Five failures and five challenges for prevention and early intervention for personality disorder

Despite global consensus regarding the early detection of personality disorder, current approaches to early intervention have failed to deliver for the majority of young people. This only serves to reinforce the enduring effects of personality disorder on functioning, mental and physical health, resulting in a reduction of quality of life and life expectancy. Here, we describe five significant challenges facing prevention and early intervention for personality disorder: identification, access to treatment, research translation, innovation and functional recovery. These challenges highlight the need for early intervention to shift from niche programmes in specialist services for a select few young people to become established in mainstream primary care and specialist youth mental health services.