Executive function, attention, and memory deficits in antisocial personality disorder and psychopathy.

Antisocial personality disorder (ASPD) and psychopathy attempt to represent individuals demonstrating callousness and disregard for others. ASPD has been criticized for capturing a heterogeneous population whilst missing the essence of the diagnosis by neglecting interpersonal/affective deficits which measures of psychopathy include. This heterogeneity in operationalizations has led to diverse findings without clear understanding of what characterizes this broader population. This study sought to clarify the neuropsychological profiles of ASPD and psychopathy. The Cambridge Neuropsychological Test Assessment Battery was administered to 85 adult male offenders in a personality disorder secure service and to 20 healthy controls. Of patients with ASPD, 46% met criteria for psychopathy. Of those with psychopathy, 89% met criteria for ASPD. There were two sets of comparisons: ASPD versus other personality disorders versus controls and psychopathy versus other personality disorders versus controls. ASPD showed deficits across executive functions, visual short-term and working memory, and attention (compared with controls). Psychopathy showed deficits limited to attention, complex planning, inhibitory control, and response reversal. Response reversal and visual search deficits appeared specific to ASPD and psychopathy versus other personality disorders and may underpin antisocial traits. Additional deficits in inhibitory control and working memory appeared to distinguish ASPD from other personality disorders.

Characteristics and Pathways of Long-Stay Patients in High and Medium Secure Settings in England; A Secondary Publication From a Large Mixed-Methods Study.

Background: Many patients experience extended stays within forensic care, but the characteristics of long-stay patients are poorly understood. Aims: To describe the characteristics of long-stay patients in high and medium secure settings in England. Method: Detailed file reviews provided clinical, offending and risk data for a large representative sample of 401 forensic patients from 2 of the 3 high secure settings and from 23 of the 57 medium secure settings in England on 1 April 2013. The threshold for long-stay status was defined as 5 years in medium secure care or 10 years in high secure care, or 15 years in a combination of high and medium secure settings. Results: 22% of patients in high security and 18% in medium security met the definition for "long-stay," with 20% staying longer than 20 years. Of the long-stay sample, 58% were violent offenders (22% both sexual and violent), 27% had been convicted for violent or sexual offences whilst in an institutional setting, and 26% had committed a serious assault on staff in the last 5 years. The most prevalent diagnosis was schizophrenia (60%) followed by personality disorder (47%, predominantly antisocial and borderline types); 16% were categorised as having an intellectual disability. Overall, 7% of the long-stay sample had never been convicted of any offence, and 16.5% had no index offence prompting admission. Although some significant differences were found between the high and medium secure samples, there were more similarities than contrasts between these two levels of security. The treatment pathways of these long-stay patients involved multiple moves between settings. An unsuccessful referral to a setting of lower security was recorded over the last 5 years for 33% of the sample. Conclusions: Long-stay patients accounted for one fifth of the forensic inpatient population in England in this representative sample. A significant proportion of this group remain unsettled. High levels of personality pathology and the risk of assaults on staff and others within the care setting are likely to impact on treatment and management. Further research into the treatment pathways of longer stay patients is warranted to understand the complex trajectories of this group.

Clozapine dose for schizophrenia.

BACKGROUND: Schizophrenia and related disorders such as schizophreniform and schizoaffective disorder are serious mental illnesses characterised by profound disruptions in thinking and speech, emotional processes, behaviour and sense of self. Clozapine is useful in the treatment of schizophrenia and related disorders, particularly when other antipsychotic medications have failed. It improves positive symptoms (such as delusions and hallucinations) and negative symptoms (such as withdrawal and poverty of speech). However, it is unclear what dose of clozapine is most effective with the least side effects. OBJECTIVES: To compare the efficacy and tolerability of clozapine at different doses and to identify the optimal dose of clozapine in the treatment of schizophrenia, schizophreniform and schizoaffective disorders. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's Study-Based Register of Trials (August 2011 and 8 December 2016). SELECTION CRITERIA: All relevant randomised controlled trials (RCTs), irrespective of blinding status or language, that compared the effects of clozapine at different doses in people with schizophrenia and related disorders, diagnosed by any criteria. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We independently inspected citations from the searches, identified relevant abstracts, obtained full articles of relevant abstracts, and classified trials as included or excluded. We included trials that met our inclusion criteria and reported useable data. For dichotomous data, we calculated the relative risk (RR) and the 95% confidence interval (CI) on an intention-to-treat basis based on a random-effects model. For continuous data, we calculated mean differences (MD) again based on a random-effects model. We assessed risk of bias for included studies and created 'Summary of findings' tables using GRADE. MAIN RESULTS: We identified five studies that could be included. Each compared the effects of clozapine at very low dose (up to 149 mg/day), low dose (150 mg/day to 300 mg/day) and standard dose (301 mg/day to 600 mg/day). Four of the five included studies were based on a small number of participants. We rated all the evidence reported for the main outcomes of interest as low or very low quality. No data were available for the main outcomes of global state, service use or quality of life. Very low dose compared to low doseWe found no evidence of effect on mental state between low and very low doses of clozapine in terms of average Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale-Anchored (BPRS-A) endpoint score (1 RCT, n = 31, MD 3.55, 95% CI -4.50 to 11.60, very low quality evidence). One study found no difference between groups in body mass index (BMI) in the short term (1 RCT, n = 59, MD -0.10, 95% CI -0.95 to 0.75, low-quality evidence). Very low dose compared to standard doseWe found no evidence of effect on mental state between very low doses and standard doses of clozapine in terms of average BPRS-A endpoint score (1 RCT, n = 31, MD 6.67, 95% CI -2.09 to 15.43, very low quality evidence). One study found no difference between groups in BMI in the short term (1 RCT, n = 58, MD 0.10, 95% CI -0.76 to 0.96, low-quality evidence) Low dose compared to standard doseWe found no evidence of effect on mental state between low doses and standard doses of clozapine in terms of both clinician-assessed clinical improvement (2 RCTs, n = 141, RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.36 to 1.61, medium-quality evidence) and clinically important response as more than 30% change in BPRS score (1 RCT, n = 176, RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.10, medium-quality evidence). One study found no difference between groups in BMI in the short term (1 RCT, n = 57, MD 0.20, 95% CI -0.84 to 1.24, low-quality evidence).We found some evidence of effect for other adverse effect outcomes; however, the data were again limited. Very low dose compared to low doseThere was limited evidence that serum triglycerides were lower at low-dose clozapine compared to very low dose in the short term (1 RCT, n = 59, MD 1.00, 95% CI 0.51 to 1.49). Low dose compared to standard doseWeight gain was lower at very low dose compared to standard dose (1 RCT, n = 27, MD -2.70, 95% CI -5.38 to -0.02). Glucose level one hour after meal was also lower at very lose dose (1 RCT, n = 58, MD -1.60, 95% CI -2.90 to -0.30). Total cholesterol levels were higher at very low compared to standard dose (1 RCT, n = 58, n = 58, MD 1.00, 95% CI 0.20 to 1.80). Low dose compared to standard doseThere was evidence of fewer adverse effects, measured as lower TESS scores, in the low-dose group in the short term (2 RCTs, n = 266, MD -3.99, 95% CI -5.75 to -2.24); and in one study there was evidence that the incidence of lethargy (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.60 to 0.97), hypersalivation (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.57 to 0.84), dizziness (RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.39 to 0.81) and tachycardia (RR 0.57, 95% CI 0.45 to 0.71) was less at low dose compared to standard dose. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We found no evidence of effect on mental state between standard, low and very low dose regimes, but we did not identify any trials on high or very high doses of clozapine. BMI measurements were similar between groups in the short term, although weight gain was less at very low dose compared to standard dose in one study. There was limited evidence that the incidence of some adverse effects was greater at standard dose compared to lower dose regimes. We found very little useful data and the evidence available is generally of low or very low quality. More studies are needed to validate our findings and report on outcomes such as relapse, remission, social functioning, service utilisation, cost-effectiveness, satisfaction with care, and quality of life. There is a particular lack of medium- or long-term outcome data, and on dose regimes above the standard rate.

Pharmacological interventions for those who have sexually offended or are at risk of offending.

BACKGROUND: Sexual offending is a serious social problem, a public health issue, and a major challenge for social policy. Victim surveys indicate high incidence and prevalence levels and it is accepted that there is a high proportion of hidden sexual victimisation. Surveys report high levels of psychiatric morbidity in survivors of sexual offences.Biological treatments of sex offenders include antilibidinal medication, comprising hormonal drugs that have a testosterone-suppressing effect, and non-hormonal drugs that affect libido through other mechanisms. The three main classes of testosterone-suppressing drugs in current use are progestogens, antiandrogens, and gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) analogues. Medications that affect libido through other means include antipsychotics and serotonergic antidepressants (SSRIs). OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effects of pharmacological interventions on target sexual behaviour for people who have been convicted or are at risk of sexual offending. SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL (2014, Issue 7), Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, and 15 other databases in July 2014. We also searched two trials registers and requested details of unidentified, unpublished, or ongoing studies from investigators and other experts. SELECTION CRITERIA: Prospective controlled trials of antilibidinal medications taken by individuals for the purpose of preventing sexual offences, where the comparator group received a placebo, no treatment, or 'standard care', including psychological treatment. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Pairs of authors, working independently, selected studies, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias of included studies. We contacted study authors for additional information, including details of methods and outcome data. MAIN RESULTS: We included seven studies with a total of 138 participants, with data available for 123. Sample sizes ranged from 9 to 37. Judgements for categories of risk of bias varied: concerns were greatest regarding allocation concealment, blinding of outcome assessors, and incomplete outcome data (dropout rates in the five community-based studies ranged from 3% to 54% and results were usually analysed on a per protocol basis).Participant characteristics in the seven studies were heterogeneous, but the vast majority had convictions for sexual offences, ranging from exhibitionism to rape and child molestation.Six studies examined the effectiveness of three testosterone-suppressing drugs: cyproterone acetate (CPA), ethinyl oestradiol (EO), and medroxyprogesterone acetate (MPA); a seventh evaluated two antipsychotics (benperidol and chlorpromazine). Five studies were placebo-controlled; in two, MPA was administered as an adjunctive treatment to a psychological therapy (assertiveness training or imaginal desensitisation). Meta-analysis was not possible due to heterogeneity of interventions, comparators, study designs, and other issues. The quality of the evidence overall was poor. In addition to methodological issues, much evidence was indirect. PRIMARY OUTCOME: recividism. Two studies reported recidivism rates formally. One trial of intramuscular MPA plus imaginal desensitisation (ID) found no reports of recividism at two-year follow-up for the intervention group (n = 10 versus one relapse within the group treated by ID alone). A three-armed trial of oral MPA, alone or in combination with psychological treatment, reported a 20% rate of recidivism amongst those in the combined treatment arm (n = 15) and 50% of those in the psychological treatment only group (n = 12). Notably, all those in the 'oral MPA only' arm of this study (n = 5) dropped out immediately, despite treatment being court mandated.Two studies did not report recidivism rates as they both took place in one secure psychiatric facility from which no participant was discharged during the study, whilst another three studies did not appear directly to measure recividism but rather abnormal sexual activity alone. SECONDARY OUTCOMES: The included studies report a variety of secondary outcomes. Results suggest that the frequency of self reported deviant sexual fantasies may be reduced by testosterone-suppressing drugs, but not the deviancy itself (three studies). Where measured, hormonal levels, particularly levels of testosterone, tended to correlate with measures of sexual activity and with anxiety (two studies). One study measured anxiety formally; one study measured anger or aggression. Adverse events: Six studies provided information on adverse events. No study tested the effects of testosterone-suppressing drugs beyond six to eight months and the cross-over design of some studies may obscure matters (given the 'rebound effect' of some hormonal treatments). Considerable weight gain was reported in two trials of oral MPA and CPA. Side effects of intramuscular MPA led to discontinuation in some participants after three to five injections (the nature of these side effects was not described). Notable increases in depression and excess salivation were reported in one trial of oral MPA. The most severe side effects (extra-pyramidal movement disorders and drowsiness) were reported in a trial of antipsychotic medication for the 12 participants in the study. No deaths or suicide attempts were reported in any study. The latter is important given the association between antilibidinal hormonal medication and mood changes. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We found only seven small trials (all published more than 20 years ago) that examined the effects of a limited number of drugs. Investigators reported issues around acceptance and adherence to treatment. We found no studies of the newer drugs currently in use, particularly SSRIs or GnRH analogues. Although there were some encouraging findings in this review, their limitations do not allow firm conclusions to be drawn regarding pharmacological intervention as an effective intervention for reducing sexual offending.The tolerability, even of the testosterone-suppressing drugs, was uncertain given that all studies were small (and therefore underpowered to assess adverse effects) and of limited duration, which is not consistent with current routine clinical practice. Further research is required before it is demonstrated that their administration reduces sexual recidivism and that tolerability is maintained.It is a concern that, despite treatment being mandated in many jurisdictions, evidence for the effectiveness of pharmacological interventions is so sparse and that no RCTs appear to have been published in two decades. New studies are therefore needed and should include trials with larger sample sizes, of longer duration, evaluating newer medications, and with results stratified according to category of sexual offenders. It is important that data are collected on the characteristics of those who refuse and those who drop out, as well as those who complete treatment.

Development and validation of a treatment progress scale for personality disordered offenders.

BACKGROUND: There is a need for a measure to evaluate change in treatment for offenders with a personality disorder, and the Progress Rating Scale (PRS) was developed to meet this need taking account of multiprofessional input. METHOD: The PRS comprises six process and five non-process items developed via thematic analysis of routine CPA patient treatment reports at a forensic Personality Disorder Service. Rating for items was fully standardized and operationalized with revisions aiming to maximize inter-rater agreement reflecting good face and content validity. Psychometric properties were examined using PRS ratings for 147 patients at three different time points in conjunction with relevant psychometrics. RESULTS: Following refinement, the instrument demonstrated good content validity. Intra-class correlations suggested moderate to substantial inter-rater agreement (intraclass correlations: 0.63-0.92). Item analyses indicated good internal consistency for process items (Cronbach's alpha: 0.82-0.88). Correlations with relevant psychometrics revealed meaningful relationships between PRS scores, defence styles and social problem solving. PRS score trajectories were in line with previously known treatment outcomes supporting predictive validity. CONCLUSION: The PRS shows promise as process measure in clinical settings but requires further testing on other samples to confirm initial findings and demonstrate its utility.

Defence styles in a sample of forensic patients with personality disorder.

BACKGROUND: Ego defences, often considered central to clinical work, have received surprisingly little attention in the forensic literature. METHOD: In this exploratory study, 114 male inpatients completed the Defence Style Questionnaire (DSQ) following their admission to a specialist personality disorder (PD) service. Change in DSQ scores over time was examined using mixed effects models for those (n = 48) remaining in treatment for at least 18 months. RESULTS: Defensive functioning at baseline was less mature in comparison with non-clinical norms, with two other non-forensic PD samples, and with a male paedophile sample, but was unrelated to criminal history. Axis II severity was negatively associated with overall defensive functioning (ODF). Antisocial PD was positively associated with a maladaptive defence style. Borderline PD was negatively associated with self-sacrificing defences. Avoidant PD was negatively associated with both self-sacrificing and adaptive styles. Non-completion of treatment was predicted by low ODF scores and high maladaptive defence style scores at baseline. ODF improved significantly over time in treatment and was predicted by strong antisocial and weak schizotypal PD pathologies. CONCLUSIONS: Defence style, as measured by the DSQ, appears to have the potential to inform assessment and measure change in this group of offenders.

Group-based parent training programmes for improving parental psychosocial health.

BACKGROUND: Parental psychosocial health can have a significant effect on the parent-child relationship, with consequences for the later psychological health of the child. Parenting programmes have been shown to have an impact on the emotional and behavioural adjustment of children, but there have been no reviews to date of their impact on parental psychosocial wellbeing. OBJECTIVES: To address whether group-based parenting programmes are effective in improving parental psychosocial wellbeing (for example, anxiety, depression, guilt, confidence). SEARCH METHODS: We searched the following databases on 5 December 2011: CENTRAL (2011, Issue 4), MEDLINE (1950 to November 2011), EMBASE (1980 to week 48, 2011), BIOSIS (1970 to 2 December 2011), CINAHL (1982 to November 2011), PsycINFO (1970 to November week 5, 2011), ERIC (1966 to November 2011), Sociological Abstracts (1952 to November 2011), Social Science Citation Index (1970 to 2 December 2011), metaRegister of Controlled Trials (5 December 2011), NSPCC Library (5 December 2011). We searched ASSIA (1980 to current) on 10 November 2012 and the National Research Register was last searched in 2005. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials that compared a group-based parenting programme with a control condition and used at least one standardised measure of parental psychosocial health. Control conditions could be waiting-list, no treatment, treatment as usual or a placebo. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: At least two review authors extracted data independently and assessed the risk of bias in each study. We examined the studies for any information on adverse effects. We contacted authors where information was missing from trial reports. We standardised the treatment effect for each outcome in each study by dividing the mean difference in post-intervention scores between the intervention and control groups by the pooled standard deviation. MAIN RESULTS: We included 48 studies that involved 4937 participants and covered three types of programme: behavioural, cognitive-behavioural and multimodal. Overall, we found that group-based parenting programmes led to statistically significant short-term improvements in depression (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.17, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.28 to -0.07), anxiety (SMD -0.22, 95% CI -0.43 to -0.01), stress (SMD -0.29, 95% CI -0.42 to -0.15), anger (SMD -0.60, 95% CI -1.00 to -0.20), guilt (SMD -0.79, 95% CI -1.18 to -0.41), confidence (SMD -0.34, 95% CI -0.51 to -0.17) and satisfaction with the partner relationship (SMD -0.28, 95% CI -0.47 to -0.09). However, only stress and confidence continued to be statistically significant at six month follow-up, and none were significant at one year. There was no evidence of any effect on self-esteem (SMD -0.01, 95% CI -0.45 to 0.42). None of the trials reported on aggression or adverse effects.The limited data that explicitly focused on outcomes for fathers showed a statistically significant short-term improvement in paternal stress (SMD -0.43, 95% CI -0.79 to -0.06). We were unable to combine data for other outcomes and individual study results were inconclusive in terms of any effect on depressive symptoms, confidence or partner satisfaction. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this review support the use of parenting programmes to improve the short-term psychosocial wellbeing of parents. Further input may be required to ensure that these results are maintained. More research is needed that explicitly addresses the benefits for fathers, and that examines the comparative effectiveness of different types of programme along with the mechanisms by which such programmes bring about improvements in parental psychosocial functioning.

Personality disorder traits and self-reported target problems in a treatment-seeking sample.

BACKGROUND: Assessments of personality disorder (PD) by clinicians or researchers are not always congruent with the problems that clients view as most salient. This can result in disagreement over areas for change, leading to dissatisfaction and the risk of treatment attrition. METHOD: The sample comprised 141 treatment-seeking adults with PD. Each described the five things they most wanted to change about themselves. These target problems were compared with PD diagnoses obtained from the International Personality Disorder Examination. RESULTS: The congruence between the clients' target problems and PD traits identified by the professionals was generally weak. Disagreement arose where a client's target problem was not a PD trait and, less frequently, where the client and the professional agreed on the presence of a trait but not on its importance. Surprisingly, doubting the trustworthiness of others was the most commonly reported target problem in this treatment-seeking sample even though many such participants did not qualify for that particular paranoid trait. CONCLUSION: Personality disorder diagnoses were generally poor indicators of the problems these clients cited as most important. This lack of correspondence may explain some of the lack of effectiveness of interventions for PD. KEY PRACTITIONER MESSAGE: The problem that a client with personality disorder (PD) views as most important may only be weakly identified in a formal diagnostic assessment. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition, PD traits are insufficient to describe fully the things clients most want to change about themselves. Many clients with PD consider difficulty trusting others to be their most important problem, despite not qualifying for that particular paranoid trait. Risk of disagreement between the clinician and the client might be reduced if both parties can engage in a discussion about the results of any formal diagnostic assessment.

The influence of admission characteristics on outcome: evidence from a medium secure forensic cohort.

OBJECTIVE: Outcomes for any mental health service will vary with the characteristics of those admitted as well as with the clinical provision of the service itself. This study aims to explore, for a medium secure forensic service in England, temporal changes in (1) characteristics of those admitted and (2) outcome after discharge and (3) to examine whether such changes are related. METHOD: Baseline characteristics and reconviction outcomes were derived from multiple data sources for 550 first admissions to a medium secure forensic unit for a 20-year period. Time to reconviction was examined using Kaplan-Meier analysis and Cox regression. RESULTS: Over time, severity of admissions increased, as did discharges to prison; discharges to non-secure hospitals reduced. Risk of reconviction increased by 3.9%-4.2% for each year of admission from 1983, which was explained by the increased admission of higher-risk patients. CONCLUSION: This medium secure service admitted patients with increasing levels of risk; reoffending rates reflect admission characteristics. Service funding decisions should take account of the characteristics of those admitted. SIGNIFICANT OUTCOMES: This study indicates that the profile of patients admitted over a 20-year period increased in severity. Over time, reconviction after discharge occurred earlier after release. This increase in reconviction was explained by the type of patient admitted. LIMITATIONS: Examination of a cohort from a single medium secure unit limits the generalizability of the findings. The study focuses on a criminological outcome measure (i.e. reconviction); other domains may be equally relevant (e.g. the relief of psychological distress). Examining an entire series of admissions introduces heterogeneity by, for example, considering the outcome of men and women together.

Cost implications of treatment non-completion in a forensic personality disorder service.

BACKGROUND: A high proportion of individuals admitted to specialist secure hospital services for treatment of personality disorder do not complete treatment. Non-completion has been associated with poorer treatment outcomes and increased rates of recidivism and hospital readmission, when compared with individuals who do complete treatment or who do not receive treatment at all. AIMS: In this study, we sought to determine the economic consequences of non-completion of treatment, using case study data from a secure hospital sample. Both health and criminal justice service perspectives were taken into account. METHODS: Data were collected from a medium secure hospital personality disorder unit. A probabilistic decision-analytic model was constructed, using a Markov cohort simulation with 10,000 iterations. The expected cost differential between those who do and those who do not complete treatment was estimated, as was the probability of a cost differential over a 10-year post-admission time horizon. RESULTS: On average, in the first 10 years following admission, those who do not complete treatment go on to incur £52,000 more in costs to the National Health Service and criminal justice system than those who complete treatment. The model estimates that the probability that non-completers incur greater costs than completers is 78%. CONCLUSION: It is possible that an improvement in treatment completion rates in secure hospital personality disorder units would lead to some cost savings. This might be achievable through better selection into treatment or improved strategies for engagement and retention. Our study highlights a financial cost to society of individuals discharged from secure hospital care when incompletely treated. We suggest that it could, therefore, be useful for secure hospitals to introduce routine monitoring of treatment completion.

Re-offending in forensic patients released from secure care: the role of antisocial/borderline personality disorder co-morbidity, substance dependence and severe childhood conduct disorder.

BACKGROUND: Research suggests that a particular externalising phenotype, manifested in a developmental trajectory from severe childhood conduct disorder through early-onset substance abuse to adult antisocial/borderline personality disorder co-morbidity, may increase risk of antisocial behaviour in general and criminal recidivism in particular. AIM: This study aims to test the hypothesis that antisocial/borderline co-morbidity together with the triad of substance dependence, severe conduct disorder and borderline pathology would result in an increased risk of criminal recidivism. METHODS: Fifty-three men who had been assessed and treated in a secure hospital unit were followed up after they had returned to the community. They were assessed for severity of the following: (i) antisocial personality disorder; (ii) borderline personality disorder; (iii) drug/alcohol dependence; and (iv) high Psychopathy Checklist Revised scores (factors 1 and 2). RESULTS: Patients with antisocial/borderline co-morbidity took significantly less time to re-offend compared with those without such co-morbidity. Both Psychopathy Checklist Revised factor 2 and the tripartite risk measure significantly predicted time to re-offence; the former largely accounted for the predictive accuracy of the latter. CONCLUSION: Risk of criminal recidivism can be adequately assessed without recourse to the pejorative term 'psychopath'. It is sufficient to assess the presence of the three elements of our risk measure: borderline and antisocial personality disorders in the context of drug/alcohol dependence and severe childhood conduct disorder. Practical implications of the study are as follows. (i) Sound assessment of personality, inclusive of a detailed history of childhood conduct disorder as well as adolescent and adult substance misuse, yields good enough information about risk of recidivism without recourse to the pejorative concept of 'psychopathy'. (ii) Given the high risk of alcohol-related violence in individuals with antisocial/borderline co-morbidity, there is a need for specific alcohol-directed interventions to help such men retain control of their substance use.

Patients with a history of arson admitted to medium security: characteristics on admission and follow-up postdischarge.

Patients who set fires are a perennial cause of concern with psychiatric services although perhaps rather neglected in the clinical research literature. The current study considered the characteristics on admission of 129 patients, 93 men and 36 women, with a known history of arson who had been admitted to a medium secure psychiatric hospital. The distinguishing characteristics of the sample were high numbers of patients with extensive criminal histories, most probably due to high levels of prison transfer and a higher occurrence of mental illness than psychopathic disorder. Aside from return to prison, most patients were discharged either to another psychiatric hospital or directly to the community. There was a high rate of re-conviction after discharge, mainly for minor offences, with about one in 10 of discharged patients committing arson. It was established, however, that not all incidents of arson led to a prosecution. It is concluded that there are weaknesses in the areas of both risk assessment and evidence-based treatment for arsonists.

Psychological interventions for adults who have sexually offended or are at risk of offending.

BACKGROUND: Sexual offending is a legal construct that overlaps, but is not entirely congruent with, clinical constructs of disorders of sexual preference. Sexual offending is both a social and a public health issue. Victim surveys illustrate high incidence and prevalence levels, and it is commonly accepted that there is considerable hidden sexual victimisation. There are significant levels of psychiatric morbidity in survivors of sexual offences.Psychological interventions are generally based on behavioural or psychodynamic theories.Behavioural interventions fall into two main groups: those based on traditional classical conditioning and/or operant learning theory and those based on cognitive behavioural approaches. Approaches may overlap. Interventions associated with traditional classical and operant learning theory are referred to as behaviour modification or behaviour therapy, and focus explicitly on changing behaviour by administering a stimulus and measuring its effect on overt behaviour. Within sex offender treatment, examples include aversion therapy, covert sensitisation or olfactory conditioning. Cognitive behavioural therapies are intended to change internal processes - thoughts, beliefs, emotions, physiological arousal - alongside changing overt behaviour, such as social skills or coping behaviours. They may involve establishing links between offenders' thoughts, feelings and actions about offending behaviour; correction of offenders' misperceptions, irrational beliefs and reasoning biases associated with their offending; teaching offenders to monitor their own thoughts, feelings and behaviours associated with offending; and promoting alternative ways of coping with deviant sexual thoughts and desires.Psychodynamic interventions share a common root in psychoanalytic theory. This posits that sexual offending arises through an imbalance of the three components of mind: the id, the ego and the superego, with sexual offenders having temperamental imbalance of a powerful id (increased sexual impulses and libido) and a weak superego (a low level of moral probation), which are also impacted by early environment.This updates a previous Cochrane review but is based on a new protocol. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of psychological interventions on those who have sexually offended or are at risk of offending. SEARCH METHODS: In September 2010 we searched: CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Allied and Complementary Medicine (AMED), Applied Social Sciences Index and Abstracts (ASSIA), Biosis Previews, CINAHL, COPAC, Dissertation Abstracts, EMBASE, International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS), ISI Proceedings, Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI), Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI), National Criminal Justice Reference Service Abstracts Database, PsycINFO, OpenSIGLE, Social Care Online, Sociological Abstracts, UK Clinical Research Network Portfolio Database and ZETOC. We contacted numerous experts in the field. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised trials comparing psychological intervention with standard care or another psychological therapy given to adults treated in institutional or community settings for sexual behaviours that have resulted in conviction or caution for sexual offences, or who are seeking treatment voluntarily for behaviours classified as illegal. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: At least two authors, working independently, selected studies, extracted data and assessed the studies' risk of bias. We contacted study authors for additional information including details of methods and outcome data. MAIN RESULTS: We included ten studies involving data from 944 adults, all male.Five trials involved primarily cognitive behavioural interventions (CBT) (n = 664). Of these, four compared CBT with no treatment or wait list control, and one compared CBT with standard care. Only one study collected data on the primary outcome. The largest study (n = 484) involved the most complex intervention versus no treatment. Long-term outcome data are reported for groups in which the mean years 'at risk' in the community are similar (8.3 years for treatment (n = 259) compared to 8.4 in the control group (n = 225)). There was no difference between these groups in terms of the risk of reoffending as measured by reconviction for sexual offences (risk ratio (RR) 1.10; 95% CI 0.78 to 1.56).Four trials (n = 70) compared one behavioural programme with an alternative behavioural programme or with wait list control. No meta-analysis was possible for this comparison. For two studies (both cross-over, n = 29) no disaggregated data were available. The remaining two behavioural studies compared imaginal desensitisation with either covert sensitisation or as part of adjunctive drug therapy (n = 20 and 21, respectively). In these two studies, results for the primary outcome (being 'charged with anomalous behaviour') were encouraging, with only one new charge for the treated groups over one year in the former study, and in the latter study, only one new charge (in the drug-only group) over two years.One study compared psychodynamic intervention with probation. Results for this study (n = 231) indicate a slight trend in favour of the control group (probation) over the intervention (group therapy) in terms of sexual offending as measured by rearrest (RR 1.87; 95% CI 0.78 to 4.47) at 10-year follow-up.Data for adverse events, 'sexually anomalous urges' and for secondary outcomes thought to be 'dynamic' risk factors for reoffending, including anger and cognitive distortions, were limited. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The inescapable conclusion of this review is the need for further randomised controlled trials. While we recognise that randomisation is considered by some to be unethical or politically unacceptable (both of which are based on the faulty premise that the experimental treatment is superior to the control - this being the point of the trial to begin with), without such evidence, the area will fail to progress. Not only could this result in the continued use of ineffective (and potentially harmful) interventions, but it also means that society is lured into a false sense of security in the belief that once the individual has been treated, their risk of reoffending is reduced. Current available evidence does not support this belief. Future trials should concentrate on minimising risk of bias, maximising quality of reporting and including follow-up for a minimum of five years 'at risk' in the community.

Psychological therapies for people with borderline personality disorder.

BACKGROUND: Psychotherapy is regarded as the first-line treatment for people with borderline personality disorder. In recent years, several disorder-specific interventions have been developed. This is an update of a review published in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews in 2006. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of psychological interventions for borderline personality disorder (BPD). SEARCH METHODS: We searched the following databases: CENTRAL 2010(3), MEDLINE (1950 to October 2010), EMBASE (1980 to 2010, week 39), ASSIA (1987 to November 2010), BIOSIS (1985 to October 2010), CINAHL (1982 to October 2010), Dissertation Abstracts International (31 January 2011), National Criminal Justice Reference Service Abstracts (15 October 2010), PsycINFO (1872 to October Week 1 2010), Science Citation Index (1970 to 10 October 2010), Social Science Citation Index (1970 to 10 October 2010), Sociological Abstracts (1963 to October 2010), ZETOC (15 October 2010) and the metaRegister of Controlled Trials (15 October 2010). In addition, we searched Dissertation Abstracts International in January 2011 and ICTRP in August 2011. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised studies with samples of patients with BPD comparing a specific psychotherapeutic intervention against a control intervention without any specific mode of action or against a comparative specific psychotherapeutic intervention. Outcomes included overall BPD severity, BPD symptoms (DSM-IV criteria), psychopathology associated with but not specific to BPD, attrition and adverse effects. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently selected studies, assessed the risk of bias in the studies and extracted data. MAIN RESULTS: Twenty-eight studies involving a total of 1804 participants with BPD were included. Interventions were classified as comprehensive psychotherapies if they included individual psychotherapy as a substantial part of the treatment programme, or as non-comprehensive if they did not.Among comprehensive psychotherapies, dialectical behaviour therapy (DBT), mentalisation-based treatment in a partial hospitalisation setting (MBT-PH), outpatient MBT (MBT-out), transference-focused therapy (TFP), cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT), dynamic deconstructive psychotherapy (DDP), interpersonal psychotherapy (IPT) and interpersonal therapy for BPD (IPT-BPD) were tested against a control condition. Direct comparisons of comprehensive psychotherapies included DBT versus client-centered therapy (CCT); schema-focused therapy (SFT) versus TFP; SFT versus SFT plus telephone availability of therapist in case of crisis (SFT+TA); cognitive therapy (CT) versus CCT, and CT versus IPT.Non-comprehensive psychotherapeutic interventions comprised DBT-group skills training only (DBT-ST), emotion regulation group therapy (ERG), schema-focused group therapy (SFT-G), systems training for emotional predictability and problem solving for borderline personality disorder (STEPPS), STEPPS plus individual therapy (STEPPS+IT), manual-assisted cognitive treatment (MACT) and psychoeducation (PE). The only direct comparison of an non-comprehensive psychotherapeutic intervention against another was MACT versus MACT plus therapeutic assessment (MACT+). Inpatient treatment was examined in one study where DBT for PTSD (DBT-PTSD) was compared with a waiting list control. No trials were identified for cognitive analytical therapy (CAT).Data were sparse for individual interventions, and allowed for meta-analytic pooling only for DBT compared with treatment as usual (TAU) for four outcomes. There were moderate to large statistically significant effects indicating a beneficial effect of DBT over TAU for anger (n = 46, two RCTs; standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.83, 95% confidence interval (CI) -1.43 to -0.22; I(2) = 0%), parasuicidality (n = 110, three RCTs; SMD -0.54, 95% CI -0.92 to -0.16; I(2) = 0%) and mental health (n = 74, two RCTs; SMD 0.65, 95% CI 0.07 to 1.24 I(2) = 30%). There was no indication of statistical superiority of DBT over TAU in terms of keeping participants in treatment (n = 252, five RCTs; risk ratio 1.25, 95% CI 0.54 to 2.92).All remaining findings were based on single study estimates of effect. Statistically significant between-group differences for comparisons of psychotherapies against controls were observed for BPD core pathology and associated psychopathology for the following interventions: DBT, DBT-PTSD, MBT-PH, MBT-out, TFP and IPT-BPD. IPT was only indicated as being effective in the treatment of associated depression. No statistically significant effects were found for CBT and DDP interventions on either outcome, with the effect sizes moderate for DDP and small for CBT. For comparisons between different comprehensive psychotherapies, statistically significant superiority was demonstrated for DBT over CCT (core and associated pathology) and SFT over TFP (BPD severity and treatment retention). There were also encouraging results for each of the non-comprehensive psychotherapeutic interventions investigated in terms of both core and associated pathology.No data were available for adverse effects of any psychotherapy. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There are indications of beneficial effects for both comprehensive psychotherapies as well as non-comprehensive psychotherapeutic interventions for BPD core pathology and associated general psychopathology. DBT has been studied most intensely, followed by MBT, TFP, SFT and STEPPS. However, none of the treatments has a very robust evidence base, and there are some concerns regarding the quality of individual studies. Overall, the findings support a substantial role for psychotherapy in the treatment of people with BPD but clearly indicate a need for replicatory studies.

Group-based parent training programmes for improving parental psychosocial health.

BACKGROUND: Parental psychosocial health can have a significant effect on the parent-child relationship, with consequences for the later psychological health of the child. Parenting programmes have been shown to have an impact on the emotional and behavioural adjustment of children, but there have been no reviews to date of their impact on parental psychosocial wellbeing. OBJECTIVES: To address whether group-based parenting programmes are effective in improving parental psychosocial wellbeing (for example, anxiety, depression, guilt, confidence). SEARCH METHODS: We searched the following databases on 5 December 2012: CENTRAL (2011, Issue 4), MEDLINE (1950 to November 2011), EMBASE (1980 to week 48, 2011), BIOSIS (1970 to 2 December 2011), CINAHL (1982 to November 2011), PsycINFO (1970 to November week 5, 2011), ERIC (1966 to November 2011), Sociological Abstracts (1952 to November 2011), Social Science Citation Index (1970 to 2 December 2011), metaRegister of Controlled Trials (5 December 2011), NSPCC Library (5 December 2011). We searched ASSIA (1980 to current) on 10 November 2012 and the National Research Register was last searched in 2005. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials that compared a group-based parenting programme with a control condition and used at least one standardised measure of parental psychosocial health. Control conditions could be waiting-list, no treatment, treatment as usual or a placebo. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: At least two review authors extracted data independently and assessed the risk of bias in each study. We examined the studies for any information on adverse effects. We contacted authors where information was missing from trial reports. We standardised the treatment effect for each outcome in each study by dividing the mean difference in post-intervention scores between the intervention and control groups by the pooled standard deviation. MAIN RESULTS: We included 48 studies that involved 4937 participants and covered three types of programme: behavioural, cognitive-behavioural and multimodal. Overall, we found that group-based parenting programmes led to statistically significant short-term improvements in depression (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.17, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.28 to -0.07), anxiety (SMD -0.22, 95% CI -0.43 to -0.01), stress (SMD -0.29, 95% CI -0.42 to -0.15), anger (SMD -0.60, 95% CI -1.00 to -0.20), guilt (SMD -0.79, 95% CI -1.18 to -0.41), confidence (SMD -0.34, 95% CI -0.51 to -0.17) and satisfaction with the partner relationship (SMD -0.28, 95% CI -0.47 to -0.09). However, only stress and confidence continued to be statistically significant at six month follow-up, and none were significant at one year. There was no evidence of any effect on self-esteem (SMD -0.01, 95% CI -0.45 to 0.42). None of the trials reported on aggression or adverse effects.The limited data that explicitly focused on outcomes for fathers showed a statistically significant short-term improvement in paternal stress (SMD -0.43, 95% CI -0.79 to -0.06). We were unable to combine data for other outcomes and individual study results were inconclusive in terms of any effect on depressive symptoms, confidence or partner satisfaction. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this review support the use of parenting programmes to improve the short-term psychosocial wellbeing of parents. Further input may be required to ensure that these results are maintained. More research is needed that explicitly addresses the benefits for fathers, and that examines the comparative effectiveness of different types of programme along with the mechanisms by which such programmes bring about improvements in parental psychosocial functioning.

Adult antisocial syndrome with comorbid borderline pathology: association with severe childhood conduct disorder.

BACKGROUND: This study tested the hypothesis that adult antisocial syndrome co-concurrent with borderline personality disorder (AAS + BPD) would be associated with greater conduct disorder (CD) severity than AAS alone. METHODS: Sixty-nine personality disordered individuals exhibited a sufficient number of adult antisocial traits to meet DSM-IV criterion A for antisocial personality disorder (AsPD). These were subdivided into those who did (AAS + BPD) or did not (AAS alone) meet DSM-IV criteria for a BPD diagnosis. We then compared the 2 groups on CD symptoms and historical, clinical, and self-report measures. RESULTS: The mean number of CD criteria met and the total number of individual CD symptoms were significantly greater in the AAS + BPD group compared with the AAS alone group. The former also were more likely to be female, to have self-harmed, to show greater personality disorder comorbidity, and to self-report greater anger. CONCLUSIONS: The functional link between CD and adult antisocial symptoms appears to be mediated, or at least moderated, by co-occurring borderline pathology.

A systematic review of measures of therapeutic engagement in psychosocial and psychological treatment.

This article reports a systematic review of engagement measures for psychosocial therapy. MEDLINE, EMBASE, and PsycINFO databases were searched to identify English-language studies (published 1980 to February 2010) that reported on an instrument/rating scale to measure engagement in psychosocial treatment for mental health difficulties. Forty-seven studies were identified, reporting information on 40 measures of treatment engagement. Although our findings suggest that therapeutic engagement appears to be considered an important construct to assess, they also reveal that there is little consensus in the definition of engagement employed. Few measures are generalizable across treatment settings and clinical populations, and limited information is reported on the indices of reliability and validity. It is concluded that further work is required to develop adequate measures of therapeutic engagement.

Individual and group based parenting programmes for improving psychosocial outcomes for teenage parents and their children.

BACKGROUND: Parenting programmes are a potentially important means of supporting teenage parents and improving outcomes for their children, and parenting support is a priority across most Western countries. This review updates the previous version published in 2001. OBJECTIVES: To examine the effectiveness of parenting programmes in improving psychosocial outcomes for teenage parents and developmental outcomes in their children. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched to find new studies for this updated review in January 2008 and May 2010 in CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, ASSIA, CINAHL, DARE, ERIC, PsycINFO, Sociological Abstracts and Social Science Citation Index. The National Research Register (NRR) was last searched in May 2005 and UK Clinical Research Network Portfolio Database in May 2010. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials assessing short-term parenting interventions aimed specifically at teenage parents and a control group (no-treatment, waiting list or treatment-as-usual). DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We assessed the risk of bias in each study. We standardised the treatment effect for each outcome in each study by dividing the mean difference in post-intervention scores between the intervention and control groups by the pooled standard deviation. MAIN RESULTS: We included eight studies with 513 participants, providing a total of 47 comparisons of outcome between intervention and control conditions. Nineteen comparisons were statistically significant, all favouring the intervention group. We conducted nine meta-analyses using data from four studies in total (each meta-analysis included data from two studies). Four meta-analyses showed statistically significant findings favouring the intervention group for the following outcomes: parent responsiveness to the child post-intervention (SMD -0.91, 95% CI -1.52 to -0.30, P = 0.04); infant responsiveness to mother at follow-up (SMD -0.65, 95% CI -1.25 to -0.06, P = 0.03); and an overall measure of parent-child interactions post-intervention (SMD -0.71, 95% CI -1.31 to -0.11, P = 0.02), and at follow-up (SMD -0.90, 95% CI -1.51 to -0.30, P = 0.004). The results of the remaining five meta-analyses were inconclusive. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Variation in the measures used, the included populations and interventions, and the risk of bias within the included studies limit the conclusions that can be reached. The findings provide some evidence to suggest that parenting programmes may be effective in improving a number of aspects of parent-child interaction both in the short- and long-term, but further research is now needed.

Pharmacological interventions for schizotypal personality disorder.

This is the protocol for a review and there is no abstract. The objectives are as follows: To evaluate the effects of pharmacological interventions for people with Schizotypal Personality Disorder (SzPD).

Pharmacological interventions for paranoid personality disorder.

This is the protocol for a review and there is no abstract. The objectives are as follows: To evaluate the effects of pharmacological interventions for people with paranoid personality disorder (PPD).