Mentalization-Based Treatment Versus Specialist Treatment as Usual for Borderline Personality Disorder: Economic Evaluation Alongside a Randomized Controlled Trial With 36-Month Follow-Up.

The authors present an economic evaluation performed alongside a randomized controlled trial of mentalization-based treatment in a day hospital setting (MBT-DH) versus specialist treatment as usual (S-TAU) for borderline personality disorder (BPD) with a 36-month follow-up period. Ninety-five patients from two Dutch treatment institutes were randomly assigned. Societal costs were compared with the proportion of BPD remissions and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) measured using the five-dimensional EuroQol instrument. The incremental societal costs for one additional QALY could not be calculated. The costs for one additional BPD remission with MBT-DH are approximately €29,000. There was a 58% likelihood that MBT-DH leads to more remitted patients at additional costs compared with S-TAU, and a 35% likelihood that MBT-DH leads to more remissions at lower costs. MBT-DH is not cost-effective compared with S-TAU with QALYs as the outcome, and slightly more cost-effective than S-TAU at 36 months with BPD symptoms as the outcome.

Day hospital versus intensive out-patient mentalisation-based treatment for borderline personality disorder: multicentre randomised clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Two types of mentalisation-based treatment (MBT) have been developed and empirically evaluated for borderline personality disorder (BPD): day hospital MBT (MBT-DH) and intensive out-patient MBT (MBT-IOP). No trial has yet compared their efficacy. AIMS: To compare the efficacy of MBT-DH and MBT-IOP 18 months after start of treatment. MBT-DH was hypothesised to be superior to MBT-IOP because of its higher treatment intensity. METHOD: In a multicentre randomised controlled trial (Nederlands Trial Register: NTR2292) conducted at three sites in the Netherlands, patients with BPD were randomly assigned to MBT-DH (n = 70) or MBT-IOP (n = 44). The primary outcome was symptom severity (Brief Symptom Inventory). Secondary outcome measures included borderline symptomatology, personality functioning, interpersonal functioning, quality of life and self-harm. Patients were assessed every 6 months from baseline to 18 months after start of treatment. Data were analysed using multilevel modelling based on intention-to-treat principles. RESULTS: Significant improvements were found on all outcome measures, with moderate to very large effect sizes for both groups. MBT-DH was not superior to MBT-IOP on the primary outcome measure, but MBT-DH showed a clear tendency towards superiority on secondary outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Although MBT-DH was not superior to MBT-IOP on the primary outcome measure despite its greater treatment intensity, MBT-DH showed a tendency to be more effective on secondary outcomes, particularly in terms of relational functioning. Patients receiving MBT-DH and MBT-IOP, thus, seem to follow different trajectories of change, which may have important implications for clinical decision-making. Longer-term follow-up and cost-effectiveness considerations may ultimately determine the optimal intensity of specialised treatments such as MBT for patients with BPD.

Day hospital mentalization-based treatment v. specialist treatment as usual in patients with borderline personality disorder: randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Day hospital mentalization-based treatment (MBT-DH) is a promising treatment for borderline personality disorder (BPD) but its evidence base is still limited. This multi-site randomized trial compared the efficacy of MBT-DH delivered by a newly set-up service v. specialist treatment as usual (S-TAU) tailored to the individual needs of patients, and offered by a well-established treatment service. METHODS: Two mental healthcare institutes in The Netherlands participated in the study. Patients who met DSM-IV criteria for BPD and had a score of ⩾20 on the borderline personality disorder severity index (BPDSI) were randomly allocated to MBT-DH (N = 54) or S-TAU (N = 41). The primary outcome variable was the total score on the BPDSI. Secondary outcome variables included symptom severity, quality of life, and interpersonal functioning. Data were collected at baseline and every 6 months until 18-month follow-up, and were analyzed using multilevel analyses based on intention-to-treat principles. RESULTS: Both treatments were associated with significant improvements in all outcome variables. MBT-DH was not superior to S-TAU on any outcome variable. MBT-DH was associated with higher acceptability in BPD patients compared v. S-TAU, reflected in significantly higher early drop-out rates in S-TAU (34%) v. MBT-DH (9%). CONCLUSIONS: MBT-DH delivered by a newly set-up service is as effective as specialist TAU in The Netherlands in the treatment of BPD at 18-month follow-up. Further research is needed to investigate treatment outcomes in the longer term and the cost-effectiveness of these treatments.

The burden of disease in patients eligible for mentalization-based treatment (MBT): quality of life and costs.

BACKGROUND: Mentalization-Based Treatment (MBT) is a promising, though expensive treatment for severely ill patients with Borderline Personality Disorder (BPD). A high burden of disease in terms of quality of life (QoL) and life years lost can be a reason to prioritize mental health interventions, and specifically for BPD patients. Moreover, when the societal costs of the illness are high, spending resources on high treatment costs would be more easily legitimized. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to calculate the burden of disease of BPD patients eligible for MBT. METHODS: The 403 patients included in this study were recruited from two mental health care institutes in the Netherlands. All patients were eligible for MBT. Burden of disease consisted of QoL, measured with the EuroQol EQ-5D-3L, and costs, calculated using the Trimbos and Institute for Medical Technology Assessment Questionnaire for Costs Associated with Psychiatric Illness. RESULTS: The mean QoL index score was .48. The mean total costs in the year prior to treatment were €16,879 per patient, of which 21 % consisted of productivity costs. CONCLUSIONS: The burden of disease in BPD patients eligible for MBT is high, which makes it more likely that society is willing to invest in treatment for these patients. However, this finding should not be interpreted as a license to unlimitedly use resources to reimburse treatment for severe BPD patients, as these findings do not provide any information on the effectiveness of MBT or other available treatment programs for BPD. The effectiveness of available treatments should be evident by studies on the effectiveness of the treatment itself and by comparing the effectiveness of these treatments to treatment as usual and to other treatment options for BPD patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The data on this paper came from two trials: NTR2175 and NTR2292 .

Day hospital Mentalization-based treatment versus intensive outpatient Mentalization-based treatment for patients with severe borderline personality disorder: protocol of a multicentre randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Borderline personality disorder (BPD) is associated with a high socioeconomic burden. Although a number of evidence-based treatments for BPD are currently available, they are not widely disseminated; furthermore, there is a need for more research concerning their efficacy and cost-effectiveness. Such knowledge promises to lead to more efficient use of resources, which will facilitate the effective dissemination of these costly treatments. This study focuses on the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of Mentalization-Based Treatment (MBT), a manualized treatment for patients with BPD. Studies to date have either investigated MBT in a day hospitalization setting (MBT-DH) or MBT offered in an intensive outpatient setting (MBT-IOP). No trial has compared the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of these MBT programmes. As both interventions differ considerably in terms of intensity of treatment, and thus potentially in terms of efficacy and cost-effectiveness, there is a need for comparative trials. This study therefore sets out to investigate the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of MBT-DH versus MBT-IOP in patients with BPD. A secondary aim is to investigate the association between baseline measures and outcome, which might improve treatment selection and thus optimize efficacy and cost-effectiveness. METHODS/DESIGN: A multicentre randomized controlled trial comparing MBT-DH versus MBT-IOP in severe BPD patients. Patients are screened for BPD using the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV Axis II Personality Disorders, and are assessed before randomization, at the start of treatment and 6, 12, 18, 24, 30 and 36 months after the start of treatment. Patients who refuse to participate will be offered care as usual in the same treatment centre. The primary outcome measure is symptom severity as measured by the Brief Symptom Inventory. Secondary outcome measures include parasuicidal behaviour, depression, substance use, social, interpersonal, and personality functioning, attachment, mentalizing capacities, and quality of life. All analyses will be conducted based on the intention-to-treat principle. Cost-effectiveness will be calculated based on costs per quality-adjusted life-year. DISCUSSION: This multisite randomized trial will provide data to refine criteria for treatment selection for severe BPD patients and promises to optimize (cost-)effectiveness of the treatment of BPD patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NTR2292 . Registered 16 April 2010.

Day Hospital Mentalization-Based Treatment (MBT-DH) versus treatment as usual in the treatment of severe borderline personality disorder: protocol of a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Severe borderline personality disorder is associated with a very high psychosocial and economic burden. Current treatment guidelines suggest that several manualized treatments, including day hospital Mentalization-Based Treatment (MBT-DH), are effective in these patients. However, only two randomized controlled trials have compared manualized MBT-DH with treatment as usual. Given the relative paucity of data supporting the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of MBT-DH, the possible influence of researcher allegiance in one of the trials, and potential problems with the generalization of findings to mental health systems in other countries, this multi-site randomized trial aims to investigate the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of manualized MBT-DH compared to manualized specialist treatment as usual in The Netherlands. METHODS/DESIGN: The trial is being conducted at two sites in The Netherlands. Patients with a DSM-IV-TR diagnosis of borderline personality disorder and a score of ≥ 20 on the Borderline Personality Disorder Severity Index were randomly allocated to MBT-DH or treatment as usual. The MBT-DH program consists of a maximum of 18 months' intensive treatment, followed by a maximum of 18 months of maintenance therapy. Specialist treatment as usual is provided by the City Crisis Service in Amsterdam, a service that specializes in treating patients with personality disorders, offering manualized, non-MBT interventions including family interventions, Linehan training, social skills training, and pharmacotherapy, without a maximum time limit. Patients are assessed at baseline and subsequently every 6 months up to 36 months after the start of treatment. The primary outcome measure is the frequency and severity of manifestations of borderline personality disorder as assessed by the Borderline Personality Disorder Severity Index. Secondary outcome measures include parasuicidal behaviour, symptomatic distress, social and interpersonal functioning, personality functioning, attachment, capacity for mentalizing and quality of life. Cost-effectiveness is assessed in terms of the cost per quality-adjusted life year. Outcomes will be analyzed using multilevel analyses based on intention-to-treat principles. DISCUSSION: Severe borderline personality disorder is a serious psychological disorder that is associated with high burden. This multi-site randomized trial will provide further data concerning the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of MBT-DH for these patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NTR2175.

Long-term outcome of inpatient psychotherapy for adolescents (IPA) with personality pathology.

Little is known about the effectiveness of treatment programs for adolescents with personality disorders (PDs). This descriptive study investigated long-term outcomes of inpatient psychotherapy for adolescents (IPA). In addition, predictors of long-term treatment effects were investigated. Seventy adolescents who completed their treatment were followed during and after their stay in IPA. Semistructured interviews were used to assess Axis I and Axis II disorders. Patients completed questionnaires to measure symptom severity and personality styles and functioning. Patients showed improvements (d ranging from .18 to .80). After leaving IPA, a small relapse rate was shown. Higher levels of dependency or more Cluster C PD traits significantly predicted positive long-term treatment outcome. Although IPA might be effective for a particular group of adolescents, mean long-term treatment effects were at best modest. Given the high costs of IPA, developing adjustments to IPA and their guidelines is warranted to ensure cost-effectiveness.

Predictors of treatment outcome of Inpatient Psychotherapy for Adolescents with personality pathology.

Little is known about the effectiveness of treatment programmes for personality disordered adolescents. This study investigates the treatment outcome of Inpatient Psychotherapy for Adolescents (IPA), i.e. an intensive programme for treatment refractory adolescents with personality pathology. In addition, this study examines predictors of treatment outcome. One hundred and nine adolescents admitted for treatment of their personality problems were followed up during their stay in IPA. Axis I and Axis II disorders were measured using semi-structured interviews, and the adolescents completed several questionnaires to measure symptom severity (global indices of distress), personality styles and functioning, and quality of life at both start and 12 months after start of treatment. Patients showed improvement in level of symptom severity, personality functioning and quality of life (d ranging from 0.49 to 0.97). As for level of symptom severity, 29% of the adolescents moved into a normative range of symptom severity. Higher levels of self-criticism significantly predicted poorer outcome in terms of symptom severity. Type of personality disorder did not predict treatment outcome. IPA is a potentially effective treatment programme for (a subgroup of) treatment refractory adolescents with personality pathology.

Feasibility of mentalization-based treatment for adolescents with borderline symptoms: a pilot study.

Mentalization-based treatment (MBT) is an evidence-based treatment for adults suffering from borderline personality disorder. Different adaptations of MBT for adolescents have been described, but almost none of these have been systematically evaluated so far. This article presents pilot data from a feasibility study of an adaptation of inpatient MBT for adolescents with borderline symptoms (MBT-A). Preliminary outcome results were examined in a pilot study including 11 female adolescents (aged 14-18 years) in a mental health care center in the Netherlands. Maximum treatment duration was 12 months and patients were assessed at start and at 12 months after start of treatment. Outcome measures included symptom severity (Brief Symptom Inventory), personality functioning (Severity Indices of Personality Problems), and quality of life (EuroQol). Results showed significant decreases in symptoms, and improvements in personality functioning and quality of life at 12 months after start of treatment. Effect sizes (d) ranged from .58 to 1.46, indicating medium to large effects. In total, 91% of the adolescents showed reliable change on the BSI, and 18% also moved to the functional range on the BSI. The results of this feasibility study are promising and encourage further research concerning the efficacy of MBT in adolescents with borderline symptoms, although some problems with implementation suggest that an outpatient variant of MBT for adolescents might be as effective while at the same time reducing potential iatrogenic effects of inpatient treatment for this age group.

The burden of disease among adolescents with personality pathology: quality of life and costs.

In adults, personality disorders are associated with a low quality of life and high societal costs. To explore whether these findings also apply to adolescents, 131 adolescent patients were recruited from a mental health care institute in The Netherlands. Axis I and Axis II disorders were diagnosed using semi-structured interviews. The EuroQol EQ-5D was used to measure quality of life and costs were measured by the Trimbos and Institute for Medical Technology Assessment Questionnaire on Costs Associated with Psychiatric Illness. The mean EQ-5D index value was 0.55. The mean direct medical cost in the year prior to treatment was €14,032 per patient. The co-occurrence of Axis I and Axis II disorders was a significant predictor of a low quality of life. Direct medical costs were higher for the depressive personality disorder. This study shows that the burden of disease among adolescents with personality pathology is high. This high burden provides evidence to suggest that further research and development of (cost-)effective treatment strategies for this population may be worthwhile.