RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: A common aspect of evidence-based treatments for people with borderline personality disorder (BPD) is pedagogical interventions and formats. In mentalization-based treatment (MBT) the introductory course has a clear pedagogical format, but a pedagogical stance is not otherwise defined. METHODS: Treatment integrity was quantitatively assessed in a sample of 346 individual MBT sessions. Nine group sessions and 24 individual MBT sessions were qualitatively subjected to interpretative phenomenological analysis (IPA). RESULTS: The dominating intervention type was MBT Item 16-therapist checking own understanding (31% of the interventions). IPA unveiled the following: (1) a pervasive, but hidden/implicit psychopedagogical agenda, (2) psychopedagogical content seemed precious for the patients, and (3) four tentative strategies for pedagogical interventions in MBT (a) independent reasoning; (b) epistemic trust; (c) mental flexibility; and (d) application of verified insights, knowledge, or strategies. CONCLUSION: Development and clarification of the pedagogical stance in MBT could further improve the quality of therapists' interventions.
Asunto(s)
Trastorno de Personalidad Limítrofe , Mentalización , Teoría de la Mente , Trastorno de Personalidad Limítrofe/terapia , Humanos , Terapia Basada en la Mentalización , Psicoterapia/métodos , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Borderline personality disorder (BPD) typically onsets in adolescence and predicts later functional disability in adulthood. Highly structured evidence-based psychotherapeutic programs, including mentalization-based treatment (MBT), are first choice treatment. The efficacy of MBT for BPD has mainly been tested with adults, and no RCT has examined the effectiveness of MBT in groups (MBT-G) for adolescent BPD. METHOD: A total of 112 adolescents (111 females) with BPD (106) or BPD symptoms ≥4 DSM-5 criteria (5) referred to child and adolescent psychiatric outpatient clinics were randomized to a 1-year MBT-G, consisting of three introductory, psychoeducative sessions, 37 weekly group sessions, five individual case formulation sessions, and six group sessions for caregivers, or treatment as usual (TAU) with at least 12 monthly individual sessions. The primary outcome was the score on the borderline personality features scale for children (BPFS-C); secondary outcomes included self-harm, depression, externalizing and internalizing symptoms (all self-report), caregiver reports, social functioning, and borderline symptoms rated by blinded clinicians. Outcome assessments were made at baseline, after 10, 20, and 30 weeks, and at end of treatment (EOT). The ClinicalTrials.gov identifier is NCT02068326. RESULTS: At EOT, the primary outcome was 71.3 (SD = 15.0) in the MBT-G group and 71.3 (SD = 15.2) in the TAU group (adjusted mean difference 0.4 BPFS-C units in favor of MBT-G, 95% confidence interval -6.3 to 7.1, p = .91). No significant group differences were found in the secondary outcomes. 29% in both groups remitted. 29% of the MBT group completed less than half of the sessions compared with 7% of the control group. CONCLUSIONS: There is no indication for superiority of either therapy method. The low remission rate points to the importance of continued research into early intervention. Specifically, retention problems need to be addressed.
Asunto(s)
Trastorno de Personalidad Limítrofe/psicología , Trastorno de Personalidad Limítrofe/terapia , Mentalización , Adolescente , Adulto , Depresión , Femenino , Humanos , Control Interno-Externo , Masculino , Conducta Autodestructiva , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
Few group psychotherapy studies focus on therapists' interventions, and instruments that can measure group psychotherapy treatment fidelity are scarce. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the reliability of the Mentalization-based Group Therapy Adherence and Quality Scale (MBT-G-AQS), which is a 19-item scale developed to measure adherence and quality in mentalization-based group therapy (MBT-G). Eight MBT groups and eight psychodynamic groups (a total of 16 videotaped therapy sessions) were rated independently by five raters. All groups were long-term, outpatient psychotherapy groups with 1.5 hours weekly sessions. Data were analysed by a Generalizability Study (G-study and D-study). The generalizability models included analyses of reliability for different numbers of raters. The global (overall) ratings for adherence and quality showed high to excellent reliability for all numbers of raters (the reliability by use of five raters was 0.97 for adherence and 0.96 for quality). The mean reliability for all 19 items for a single rater was 0.57 (item range 0.26-0.86) for adherence, and 0.62 (item range 0.26-0.83) for quality. The reliability for two raters obtained mean absolute G-coefficients on 0.71 (item range 0.41-0.92 for the different items) for adherence and 0.76 (item range 0.42-0.91) for quality. With all five raters the mean absolute G-coefficient for adherence was 0.86 (item range 0.63-0.97) and 0.88 for quality (item range 0.64-0.96). The study demonstrates high reliability of ratings of MBT-G-AQS. In models differentiating between different numbers of raters, reliability was particularly high when including several raters, but was also acceptable for two raters. For practical purposes, the MBT-G-AQS can be used for training, supervision and psychotherapy research.
Asunto(s)
Adhesión a Directriz/normas , Evaluación de Procesos y Resultados en Atención de Salud/normas , Psicometría/normas , Psicoterapia de Grupo/normas , Psicoterapia Psicodinámica/normas , Teoría de la Mente , Adulto , Humanos , Reproducibilidad de los ResultadosRESUMEN
Introduction: Research indicates a similar effect of Mentalization-based treatment (MBT) and Dialectical behavior therapy (DBT) for borderline personality disorder (BPD). However, there is a paucity in studies investigating the change narrative received from and developed in these treatments. The aim of the present study is to investigate similarities and differences in the change narratives provided by MBT and DBT, and how these narratives reflect the rationale, explanations, and procedures of the provided treatment. Methods: The study is a qualitative analysis of seven interviews conducted by the authors. Three of the participants had received MBT, and four of the participants had received DBT. This study presents an Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis (IPA) of the change narratives received in two specialized treatments for BPD. Results: The main findings from the IPA were that the change narratives described by the participants reflected the treatment they received. The DBT participants highlighted explicit learning of tools and techniques, with predictable and safe therapists. In contrast, the MBT participants emphasized a long-lasting process of exploring to create procedural learning with therapists who followed their lead. Discussion: The participants' stories of change shed light on how a change narrative was developed, and therefore how the rationale, explanations and procedures were conveyed differently by MBT and DBT.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Mentalization-based treatment (MBT) is an evidence-based treatment for borderline personality disorder (BPD). Differences in treatment outcomes related to specific capacity of social cognition need further attention. This study aimed to investigate social cognition as a predictor of outcome. METHOD: The study included 31 BPD patients who completed a test of social cognition (Movie for the Assessment of Social Cognition, MASC) before outpatient MBT. The MASC-scores indicated a person's theory of mind (ToM) and different error-types. During treatment repeated self-reports of alliance and clinical outcomes (symptoms, interpersonal problems, social functioning) were applied. Longitudinal analyses were based on Linear Mixed Models (n = 24). RESULTS: The most frequent error-type was excessive ToM (hypermentalizing). Higher levels of excessive ToM were associated with greater improvement of alliance over time and good clinical outcomes. Insufficient ToM errors and low levels of accurate cognitive ToM responses were both associated with poorer improvement over time. The subgroup with frequent insufficient ToM errors had a larger total number of ToM errors. Insufficient ToM errors were associated with more childhood trauma, comorbid avoidant PD traits and/or PTSD, extensive prior treatment, and/or treatment irregularity. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates considerable variation of social cognitive capacity among BPD patients and good outcomes for patients with mainly ToM errors of hypermentalizing. It also indicates that poorly responding patients may represent a cohort with more complex problems of social cognition and insufficient mentalizing.
RESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: Mentalization-based treatment (MBT), originally designed for patients with borderline personality disorder (BPD), may be particularly indicated for severe conditions. However, there is limited documentation of how increasing severity of personality disorder (PD) effect outcomes of highly specialized treatments. This study aimed to investigate associations between clinical severity and outcomes for patients in MBT as compared to a psychodynamic group-based treatment programme (PDT). DESIGN: A naturalistic, longitudinal, comparison study. METHODS: The sample included 345 patients with BPD (PDTn = 281, MBTn = 64). The number of diagnosed PDs, PD criteria, and symptom disorders were chosen as baseline indicators of clinical severity. Clinical outcomes (global functioning, symptom distress, interpersonal problems) were repeatedly assessed over three years. Therapists' fidelity to MBT was satisfactory. Linear mixed models were the applied statistics. RESULTS: In PDT, greater clinical severity was associated with poorer improvement rates. Clinical severity was not associated with significant differences in outcomes for patients in MBT. Differences in outcomes for patients in MBT and PDT increased significantly with higher severity of disorder. CONCLUSIONS: Supporting previous research, this study indicates that clinical benefits associated with MBT also apply for BPD patients with severe conditions. The results also suggest that increasing severity was a challenge in PDT. PRACTITIONER POINTS: MBT may be particularly beneficial for severely disordered BPD patients Differences between MBT and PDT were less pronounced in moderately disordered BPD patients.