The influence of personality disorder on outcome in adolescent self-harm.

BACKGROUND: Little is currently known about the presence and impact of personality disorder in adolescents who self-harm. AIMS: To evaluate personality disorder in repeated self-harm in adolescence and its impact on self-harm psychopathology and adaptation outcomes over 1 year. METHOD: A clinical referral sample (n = 366) of adolescents presenting with repeated self-harm aged 12-17 years, as part of a randomised controlled trial (Assessment of Treatment in Suicidal Teenagers study, ASSIST). Personality disorder was assessed using the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV Axis II (SCID-II). One-year outcomes included frequency and severity of repeat self-harm, self-reported suicidality, mood and functional impairment. RESULTS: About 60% of the referred adolescents showed one or more forms of personality disorder. Personality disorder was associated with significantly greater severity of self-harm, overall psychopathology and impairment. There was a complex association with treatment adherence. Personality disorder predicted worse 1-year outcomes in relation to self-harm frequency and severity, as well as impairment, suicidality and depressive symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: Personality disorder can be reliably measured in adolescence and showed high prevalence in this clinical self-harm sample. Controlling for other variables, it showed a strong independent association with self-harm severity at referral and predicted adherence to treatment and clinical outcomes (independent of treatment) over 1 year. Consideration of personality disorder diagnosis is indicated in the assessment and management of adolescents who repeatedly self-harm.

Six years on: a prospective cohort study of male juvenile offenders in secure care.

Longitudinal studies are helpful in understanding developmental trajectories and recognising opportunities for early intervention. This paper describes the long-term needs and mental health of an initial sample of male juvenile offenders, now adults 6 years after their index admission to secure care. In this prospective cohort study of 97 male juvenile offenders admitted to secure, offenders were assessed initially on admission, 2 and 6 years later. Interviews were conducted with 54 offenders at the 6-year follow-up and included an assessment of psychosocial need, mental health and psychopathy. Outcome data on offending behaviour were collected on a total of 71 offenders. Persistent offenders have needs in multiple domains as they transition into adulthood. The majority of offenders were single and about a half were in neither employment nor training. Almost nine out of ten offenders had a substance misuse disorder and a similar number met the criteria for a diagnosis of antisocial personality disorder. Substance misuse in adolescence was strongly correlated with later substance misuse in adulthood, emphasising the importance of early intervention. A diagnosis of antisocial personality disorder and living with friends and family were both significantly associated with persistent offending behaviour. Many offenders continued to reoffend despite receiving offence-related interventions and custodial care. Interventions currently aimed at reducing recidivism in more severe offenders appear to be ineffective. Persistent offenders would benefit from a multi-modal approach based on individual needs, rather than receiving generic interventions.

Effectiveness of systemic family therapy versus treatment as usual for young people after self-harm: a pragmatic, phase 3, multicentre, randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Self-harm in adolescents is common and repetition occurs in a high proportion of these cases. Scarce evidence exists for effectiveness of interventions to reduce self-harm. METHODS: This pragmatic, multicentre, randomised, controlled trial of family therapy versus treatment as usual was done at 40 UK Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services (CAMHS) centres. We recruited young people aged 11-17 years who had self-harmed at least twice and presented to CAMHS after self-harm. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive manualised family therapy delivered by trained and supervised family therapists or treatment as usual by local CAMHS. Participants and therapists were aware of treatment allocation; researchers were masked. The primary outcome was hospital attendance for repetition of self-harm in the 18 months after group assignment. Primary and safety analyses were done in the intention-to-treat population. The trial is registered at the ISRCTN registry, number ISRCTN59793150. FINDINGS: Between Nov 23, 2009, and Dec 31, 2013, 3554 young people were screened and 832 eligible young people consented to participation and were randomly assigned to receive family therapy (n=415) or treatment as usual (n=417). Primary outcome data were available for 795 (96%) participants. Numbers of hospital attendances for repeat self-harm events were not significantly different between the groups (118 [28%] in the family therapy group vs 103 [25%] in the treatment as usual group; hazard ratio 1·14 [95% CI 0·87-1·49] p=0·33). Similar numbers of adverse events occurred in both groups (787 in the family therapy group vs 847 in the treatment as usual group). INTERPRETATION: For adolescents referred to CAMHS after self-harm, having self-harmed at least once before, our family therapy intervention conferred no benefits over treatment as usual in reducing subsequent hospital attendance for self-harm. Clinicians are therefore still unable to recommend a clear, evidence-based intervention to reduce repeated self-harm in adolescents. FUNDING: National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.

Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) and routine specialist care with and without cognitive behaviour therapy in adolescents with major depression: randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether a combination of a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRIs) and cognitive behaviour therapy (CBT) together with clinical care is more effective in the short term than an SSRI and clinical care alone in adolescents with moderate to severe major depression. DESIGN: Pragmatic randomised controlled superiority trial. SETTING: 6 outpatient clinics in Manchester and Cambridge. PARTICIPANTS: 208 adolescents, aged 11-17, with moderate to severe major or probable major depression who had not responded to a brief initial intervention. Adolescents with suicidality, depressive psychosis, or conduct disorder were included. INTERVENTIONS: 103 adolescents received an SSRI and routine care; 105 received an SSRI, routine care, and CBT. The trial lasted 12 weeks, followed by a 16 week maintenance phase. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Change in score on the Health of the Nation outcome scales for children and adolescents (primary outcome) from baseline with 12 weeks as the primary and 28 weeks as the follow-up end point. Secondary measures were change in scores on the mood and feelings questionnaire, the revised children's depression rating scale, the children's global assessment scale, and the clinical global impression improvement scale. RESULTS: At 12 weeks the treatment effect for the primary outcome was -0.64 (95% confidence interval -2.54 to 1.26, P=0.50). In a longitudinal analysis, there was no difference in effectiveness of treatment for the primary (average treatment effect 0.001, -1.52 to 1.52, P=0.99) or secondary outcome measures. On average there was a decrease in suicidal thoughts and self harm. There was no evidence of a protective effect of cognitive behaviour therapy on suicidal thinking or action. By 28 weeks, 57% were much or very much improved with 20% remaining unimproved. CONCLUSIONS: For adolescents with moderate to severe major depression there is no evidence that the combination of CBT plus an SSRI in the presence of routine clinical care contributes to an improved outcome by 28 weeks compared with the provision of routine clinical care plus an SSRI alone. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCNT 83809224.