Evaluation of health services and treatment alliance among extensively hospitalized patients due to severe self-harm - results from the Extreme Challenges project.

BACKGROUND: Extensive psychiatric hospitalization due to repeated severe self-harm (SH), is a poorly researched area, but a challenge within health services (HS). Recent studies have demonstrated high levels of involuntary treatment among patients with severe personality disorder (PD) and complex comorbidity. Keeping focus on extensively hospitalized SH patients, this study aimed to investigate patients' and clinicians' evaluation of HS and treatment alliance. METHOD: A cross-sectional study with an inpatient sample (age >18 years) with frequent (>5) or long (>4 weeks) psychiatric hospital admissions last year due to SH or SA recruited from 12 hospitals across health regions (N = 42). Evaluation included patient and clinician report. RESULTS: A minority of the patients (14%) were satisfied with HS before the current admission, 45% (patients) and 20% (clinicians) found the current admission helpful, and 46% (patients) and 14% (clinicians) worried about discharge. Treatment complaints were received in 38% of the cases. Outpatient mental HS were available after discharge for 68% and a majority of clinicians indicated satisfactory contact across HS. More intensive or specialized formats were unusual (structured outpatient treatment 35%, day treatment 21%, ambulatory services 32%, planned inpatient services 31%). Mutual problem understanding, aims, and confidence in therapists during the hospital stay were limited (patient-rated satisfactory mutual problem understanding: 39%, aims of stay: 50%, confidence: 50%). Patient and therapist alliance-ratings were in concordance for the majority. CONCLUSION: The study highlights poor HS satisfaction, poor patient-therapist coherence, limited treatment alliance and limited follow-up in structured treatments addressing SH or intermediary supportive ambulatory/day/inpatient services.

Evaluating the Construct Validity of the Norwegian Version of the Level of Personality Functioning Scale - Brief Form 2.0 in a Large Clinical Sample.

The Level of Personality Functioning - Brief Form 2.0 (LPFS-BF 2.0) is a 12-item self-report questionnaire developed to gain a quick impression of the severity of personality pathology according to the DSM-5 Alternative Model for Personality Disorders (AMPD). The current study evaluated the construct validity and reliability of the Norwegian version of the LPFS-BF 2.0 in a large clinical sample (N = 1673). Dimensionality was examined using confirmatory factor analysis and bifactor analysis followed by an analysis of distinctiveness of the subscales using the proportional reduction in mean squared error (PRMSE), and the concurrent validity was examined using correlations with self-report questionnaires and clinical interviews assessing PDs according to section II of the DSM-5. Taking the findings of the dimensionality and concurrent validity results together, we found moderate to good support for the use of total scores for the Norwegian version of the LPFS-BF 2.0. We would advise against the use of subscale scores, since the subscales provided only a small amount of reliable unique variance.

Personality disorders: the impact of severity on societal costs.

Personality disorders (PDs) are associated with high levels of societal costs. However, previous research has found limited or no evidence of unique contributions of individual PD categories on the overall level of societal costs. Recent research supports the validity of PD as a dimensional construct, and PD severity may be a better predictor of societal costs than specific PD categories. The aim of this study was to explore if PD severity could predict the level of societal costs among treatment-seeking patients with PDs, while controlling for the impact of comorbid mental health and substance use disorders. Four different severity indicators were explored: the number of PDs, the total number of PD criteria, the number of BPD criteria, and the Level of Personality Functioning Scale (LPFS) from the alternative model in DSM-5. Participants (n = 798/794) were retrieved from the quality register of the Norwegian Network for Personality Disorders for the period 2017-2020. Societal costs were assessed using a structured interview covering the six-month period prior to assessment. Diagnoses and diagnostic criteria were determined using a semi-structured diagnostic interview (SCID-5-PD and M.I.N.I), and the LPFS was assessed by the LPFS-Brief Form 2.0 (LPFS-BF 2.0) questionnaire. Statistics included multiple regression analyses. None of the severity indicators were significant predictors of overall societal costs among treatment-seeking patients, and effect sizes were small.

A borderline focused Reflective Functioning measure - Interrater reliability of the Mentalization Breakdown Interview.

OBJECTIVE: Mentalizing difficulties can be considered the core psychopathology of borderline personality disorder (BPD). Typical failures of mentalizing are targets in therapy for BPD. They are related to severe distress, relational problems, self-destructive behaviors, violence, or substance misuse. A major obstacle in BPD treatment research is the lack of suitable and easily administrated methods to assess mentalizing ability during treatment. The Mentalization Breakdown Interview (MBI) is a new method for capturing episodic mentalizing difficulties occurring in close relationships. Interviews are videotaped and scored in accordance with the Reflective Functioning Scale (MBI-RF). In this way the patients' ability to retrospectively reflect over such episodes are evaluated. This study investigates the interrater reliability of MBI-RF. METHODS: The study includes videotapes of MBIs from 32 patients with BPD in an outpatient clinic specialized on mentalization-based treatment (MBT). The MBIs were performed by MBT therapists. Three certified raters scored MBI-RF. RESULTS: The interrater reliability was good for MBI-RF. CONCLUSIONS: The MBI is promising as a BPD-focused method for the assessment of Reflective Functioning.

The Norwegian network for personality disorders - development, contributions and challenges through 30 years.

BACKGROUND: Established in 1992, the Norwegian Network for Personality Disorders (The Network) is a clinical research collaboration of specialist mental health and addiction services in Norway. Its primary focus is to facilitate systematic and relevant clinical assessment for patients with personality disorder and evaluate progress in psychotherapeutic treatment. However, large-scale data registers for personality disorder are still unique. This article presents the circumstances that led to the establishment of the Network, and its development and challenges in many areas, and through various phases. METHODS: In the following, we will outline how this close interaction between researchers, clinicians, and well-adapted systems has facilitated cooperation and clinical research. We will highlight some key factors that have been decisive during the network's development, and not least for further adaptation and existence. RESULTS: Through 30 years, the Network has succeeded in establishing a large and sustainable clinical research collaboration with a persistent focus on personality disorder and psychotherapeutic treatment. The collaboration has resulted in a broad range of scientific contributions to the understanding of personality disorder, assessment and measurement methods, treatment alliance, clinical outcomes, service utilization, and costs. In addition, The Network has also resulted in a number of synergy effects that have benefited clinicians, patients, and researchers. CONCLUSIONS: The Norwegian Network for Personality Disorders has become an acknowledged institution in the field. Many aspects of its development, organization, maintenance, and solutions to challenges may be relevant to others who plan to establish, maintain, or further develop similar collaborations.

Avoidant and borderline personality disorder patients during the first Covid-19 wave in Norway - a survey-based comparison of therapy changes and patients' accommodations.

BACKGROUND: Patients with personality disorders (PDs) often have insecure attachment patterns and may be especially vulnerable to abrupt treatment changes. Patients with borderline PD (BPD) are often considered vulnerable to treatment interruption due to chronic fear of abandonment. Nonetheless, other PDs are poorly investigated. In the first Covid-19 wave in Norway, in-person treatment facilities and group treatments were strongly restricted from March 12th until May/June 2020. OBJECTIVES: To examine and compare changes in outpatient treatment for patients with avoidant (AvPD) and BPD during the first Covid-19 wave in Norway, and patients' reactions to these changes. METHODS: The study is based on a cross-sectional survey distributed to 1120 patients referred to 12 different PD treatment units on a specialist mental health service level within the Norwegian Network for Personality Disorders. The survey included questions on treatment situation, immediate reactions, and changes during the crisis. From 133 responders (response rate 12%), 40 patients reported BPD and 30 AvPD as diagnosis. RESULTS: All patients were followed up from their therapist after March 12th. Almost all patients in both groups expressed satisfaction under the new circumstances. Both groups experienced the same regularity as before, but more AvPD patients reported less than weekly consultations. AvPD patients reported more negative feelings about changes in therapy, and missed the therapy and group members more than the BPD group. CONCLUSION: After the lockdown, BPD patients received a closer follow-up than AvPD patients, and the latter reported more negative feelings related to change in their treatment situation.

Vulnerability of personality disorder during the Covid-19 crises - a multicenter survey of treatment experiences among patients referred to treatment.

BACKGROUND: The societal shutdown due to the Covid-19 pandemic involved mental health services for personality disorder (PD) and was introduced from 12 March 2020 in Norway. Rapid implementation of treatment modifications was required for patients typically characterized by insecure attachment and vulnerability to separation. AIM: To investigate immediate reactions to the shutdown of services; alternative treatment received; and differences related to age in a clinical sample of patients with PD. DESIGN: A survey performed from June to October 2020 (after the first Covid-19 wave) among 1120 patients from 12 units offering comprehensive group-based PD programs. RESULTS: The response-rate was 12% (N = 133). Negative feelings of anxiety, sadness, and helplessness were noteworthy immediate reactions, but the dominating attitude was accommodation. Younger patients (<26 years) reported more skepticism and less relief. Modified treatment was mainly telephone therapy. Digital therapy was less available, but was more frequent among younger patients. A minority received digital group therapy. Most patients rated the frequency and quality of modified treatments as satisfactory in the given situation, but also worried about own treatment progress, lack of group therapy, and 47% missed seeing the therapist when having telephone consultations. CONCLUSION: The survey confirms a radical modification from comprehensive group-based PD programs to telephone consultations, low availability of digital consultations and group treatments. Taking a short-term, first wave perspective, the survey indicates a noteworthy capacity among poorly functioning patients for accommodating to a clearly challenging situation, as well as considerable concern about treatment progress.

Psychometric evaluation of the Norwegian Toronto Alexithymia Scale (TAS-20) in a multisite clinical sample of patients with personality disorders and personality problems.

OBJECTIVE: Psychometric properties of 20-item Toronto Alexithymia Scale (TAS-20) have been widely analyzed, but the validity and psychometric qualities of the TAS-20 in populations with personality disorders are still poorly understood. The aim of the current study was to analyze the factor structure and validity of TAS-20. METHOD: Data were extracted from a multisite clinical sample of patients with personality disorders or personality-related problems referred to specialist mental health services in Norway. RESULTS: With one exception, TAS-20 revealed acceptable psychometric properties. Variations of TAS-20 are associated with other clinical measures of distress and severity. Anxiety disorders, borderline, and avoidant personality disorders were all highly related to levels of TAS-20. The TAS-20 also revealed unique variance not accounted for by subjective distress, symptom disorders, or dysfunctional personality traits. CONCLUSION: The TAS-20 is a relevant instrument for use in assessment of personality disorders, but one subscale should be improved.

Pedagogical stance in mentalization-based treatment.

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.

Level of alexithymia as a measure of personality dysfunction in avoidant personality disorder.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Avoidant Personality Disorder (AvPD) is considered a mild to moderate personality disorder. However, few studies have focused on the heterogeneity of AvPD in terms of symptoms and severity. In the current study we set out to replicate and extend earlier findings showing that there is variation among patients with AvPD in terms of alexithymia and, further, that this variation is especially associated with specific facets of personality functioning and is not explained by measures of depression, symptom severity, or co-occurring personality disorder traits. METHOD: We used intake data from a sample of AvPD patients (n = 56) who had been treated in similar outpatient services. Alexithymia was measured using the Toronto Alexithymia Scale (TAS-20). Patients filled out questionnaires that were analysed using linear regression models. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: Using well-established cut-off points for low, intermediate and high levels of alexithymia we found an almost equal distribution of alexithymia groups in our sample. Alexithymia was associated with higher personality dysfunction on twelve out of sixteen facets of personality functioning. For eight of these personality facets the alexithymia total score explained significant variance even after controlling for self-reported depression, symptom severity and clinician ratings of personality disorder. Results suggest that AvPD is heterogeneous and that alexithymia may be important as an indicator of severity of specific personality dysfunction.

Vulnerability of personality disorder during COVID-19 crises: a multicenter survey of mental and social distress among patients referred to treatment.

BACKGROUND: Relational and emotional problems, dysregulation, self-harming or substance abuse often characterize personality disorders (PD). In Norway, COVID-19 restrictions led to an abrupt shutdown of services from 12 March 2020 also including specialized PD treatments. AIMS: The objective of this study was to investigate social and mental distress among patients with PDs during the first COVID-19 wave. DESIGN: A survey was distributed after the first COVID-19 wave (June-October 2020) among 1120 patients from 12 PD treatment units. RESULTS: The response rate was 12% (N = 133). The survey reflected impairment of occupational activity (53% <50% activity last 6 months), life quality (EQ-5D-VAS: 56, SD 19), and personality functioning (LPFS-BF ≥12: 81%, 35% avoidant PD, 44% borderline PD) and high levels of depression and anxiety (PHQ-9 ≥ 10: 84%, GAD-7 ≥ 10: 68%), 49% with health-related anxiety. Problem increase was reported for anxiety (28%), depression (24%), aggression (23%), substance use (14%), and 70% of parents had more child-care difficulties. Self-destructive behaviors (26%) did not increase. The majority (78%) reported increased or unchanged social isolation and loneliness. Occupational activity declined with negative effects on part-time jobs/rehabilitation. Therapist contact was mainly telephone-based (63% ≥ weekly contact). More severe personality problems, current depressive symptoms, and self-harming before 12 March were associated with more frequent consultations. CONCLUSION: The survey confirms severe, enhanced levels of mental distress among patients receiving telephone-based consultations as the main alternative to specialized PD treatment during the COVID-19 shutdown. The most vulnerable patients received more frequent consultations and self-destructive actions did not increase.

Misleading about MBT in Oslo.

In this correspondence we correct some misleading information about mentalization-based treatment in Oslo, Norway.

Extreme challenges: psychiatric inpatients with severe self-harming behavior in Norway: a national screening investigation.

BACKGROUND: Extreme self-harming behavior is a major challenge for patients and health services. Nevertheless, this patient population is poorly described in research literature. AIMS: The aim of this study was to assess the volume of patients with extensive psychiatric hospitalization due to extreme self-harming behaviors, the extent of severe medical sequelae, and collaboration problems within health services. METHODS: In a national screening investigation, department managers in 83 adult psychiatric inpatient institutions across all health regions in Norway were invited to participate in a brief, prepared, telephone interview. RESULTS: Sixty-one interviews were completed. Extensive hospitalization (prolonged or multiple) due to extreme self-harm was reported for the last year in all health regions and in 427 individual cases. Mean number of cases did not differ by region. Psychiatric hospitalizations were more frequent in hospital units than mental health centers. In 109 of the cases, self-harming behavior had severe medical consequences, including five deaths. In 122 of the cases, substantial collaboration problems within the health services were reported (disagreements on diagnosis, treatment needs and resources). Extensive (long-term) hospitalization was particularly associated with the combination of severe medical sequelae and collaboration problems. CONCLUSION: This investigation confirms a noteworthy, nationwide, population of severely self-harming inpatients with extensive health service use, prevalent severe medical complications, and unsatisfactory collaboration within health services. These preliminary results are alarming, and indicate a need for more profound understanding of highly complex and severe cases.

Interrater Reliability of the Structured Clinical Interview for the DSM-5 Alternative Model of Personality Disorders Module i: Level of Personality Functioning Scale.

The fifth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5) presents an alternative model for personality disorders in which severity of personality pathology is evaluated by the Level of Personality Functioning Scale (LPFS). The Structured Interview for the DSM-5 Alternative Model for Personality Disorders, Module I (SCID-5-AMPD I) is a new tool for LPFS assessment, but its interrater reliability (IRR) has not yet been tested. Here we examined the reliability of the Norwegian translation of the SCID-5-AMPD I, applying two different designs: IRR assessment based on ratings of 17 video-recorded SCID-5-AMPD I interviews by five raters; and test-retest IRR based on interviews of 33 patients administered by two different raters within a short interval. For the video-based investigation, intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) values ranged from .77 to .94 for subdomains, .89 to .95 for domains, and .96 for total LPFS. For the test-retest investigation, ICC ranged from .24 to .72 for subdomains, .59 to .90 for domains, and .75 for total LPFS. The test-retest study revealed questionable reliability estimates for some subdomains. However, overall the level of personality functioning was measured with a sufficient degree of IRR when assessed by the SCID-5-AMPD I.

The design of the MBT-G adherence and quality scale.

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.

Favourable outcome of long-term combined psychotherapy for patients with borderline personality disorder: Six-year follow-up of a randomized study.

OBJECTIVE: This study reports the six-year follow-up data of patients with borderline personality disorder (BPD) who participated in the Ullevål Personality Project (UPP), a randomized clinical study comparing outpatient individual psychotherapy (OIP) with a long-term combination programme (CP) comprising short-term day-hospital treatment followed by outpatient combined group and individual psychotherapy. METHODS: For 52 patients, outcomes were evaluated after 8 months, 18 months, 3 years, and 6 years based on a wide range of clinical measures, such as symptom severity, psychosocial functioning, personality functioning, and Axis-I and II diagnoses. RESULTS: At the six-year follow-up, patients in the CP condition reported significantly greater reduction of symptom distress and improvements in the personality functioning domains Identity Integration and Self-control compared with patients allocated to OIP. Patients in the CP also had a more favourable long-term course of psychosocial functioning. There were no differences between treatment conditions in outcomes of interpersonal functioning and self-esteem. CONCLUSIONS: Long-term psychotherapy in a combination programme seems favourable for BPD patients. In this study, patients who received combined treatment fared better on crucial parameters than patients who received individual therapy. Of particular importance are the positive effects on fundamental borderline problem areas like Identity Integration and Self-control.

Is reflective functioning associated with clinical symptoms and long-term course in patients with personality disorders?

OBJECTIVE: Mentalization is the capacity to understand behavior as the expression of various mental states and is assumed to be important in a range of psychopathologies, especially personality disorders (PDs). The first aim of the present study was to investigate the relationship between mentalization capacity, operationalized as reflective functioning (RF), and clinical manifestations before entering study treatment. The second aim was to investigate the relationship between baseline RF and long-term clinical outcome both independent of treatment (predictor analyses) and dependent on treatment (moderator analyses). METHODS: Seventy-nine patients from a randomized clinical trial (Ullevål Personality Project) who had borderline and/or avoidant PD were randomly assigned to either a step-down treatment program, comprising short-term day-hospital treatment followed by outpatient combined group and individual psychotherapy, or to outpatient individual psychotherapy. Patients were evaluated on variables including symptomatic distress, psychosocial functioning, personality functioning, and self-esteem at baseline, 8 and 18months, and 3 and 6years. RESULTS: RF was significantly associated with a wide range of variables at baseline. In longitudinal analyses RF was not found to be a predictor of long-term clinical outcome. However, when considering treatment type, there were significant moderator effects of RF. Patients with low RF had better outcomes in outpatient individual therapy compared to the step-down program. In contrast, patients in the medium RF group achieved better results in the step-down program. CONCLUSION: These findings indicate that RF is associated with core aspects of personality pathology and capture clinically relevant phenomena in adult patients with PDs. Moreover, patients with different capacities for mentalization may need different kinds of therapeutic approaches.

Step-down versus outpatient psychotherapeutic treatment for personality disorders: 6-year follow-up of the Ullevål personality project.

BACKGROUND: Although psychotherapy is considered the treatment of choice for patients with personality disorders (PDs), there is no consensus about the optimal level of care for this group of patients. This study reports the results from the 6-year follow-up of the Ullevål Personality Project (UPP), a randomized clinical trial comparing outpatient individual psychotherapy with a long-term step-down treatment program that included a short-term day hospital treatment followed by combined group and individual psychotherapy. METHODS: The UPP included 113 patients with PDs. Outcome was evaluated after 8 months, 18 months, 3 years and 6 years and was based on a wide range of clinical measures, such as psychosocial functioning, interpersonal problems, symptom severity, and axis I and II diagnoses. RESULTS: At the 6-year follow-up, there were no statistically significant differences in outcome between the treatment groups. Effect sizes ranged from medium to large for all outcome variables in both treatment arms. However, patients in the outpatient group had a marked decline in psychosocial functioning during the period between the 3- and 6-year follow-ups; while psychosocial functioning continued to improve in the step-down group during the same period. This difference between groups was statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: The findings suggest that both hospital-based long-term step-down treatment and long-term outpatient individual psychotherapy may improve symptoms and psychosocial functioning in poorly functioning PD patients. Social and interpersonal functioning continued to improve in the step-down group during the post-treatment phase, indicating that longer-term changes were stimulated during treatment. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT00378248.

Patients with personality disorders in private specialist practice.

BACKGROUND: Private practitioners with contracts with the regional health authorities have an important place among the treatment options provided by the psychiatric specialist health service. Little information is available on the part such specialists in private practice should play in the treatment of patients with personality disorders. This study describes private practitioners' experiences with this patient group and the patients' satisfaction with the treatment. MATERIAL AND METHOD: 46 patients were referred to specialists in private practice as part of a treatment study of patients with personality disorders. 26 private practitioners took part. The patient population had extensive problems with a high level of symptoms, interpersonal difficulties and poor work functioning. A follow-up investigation of the patient group was conducted after three years. The therapists answered questionnaires about their own practices and the patient therapy. RESULTS: At the time of the three-year follow-up, a third of the patients were still in therapy. The median number of therapy sessions was 43 (range 2-258 hours). On the whole, the therapists found the treatments interesting from a professional point of view, and the majority of the patients were satisfied with the therapy. Some treatments were complicated by irregular attendance, substance abuse, risk of suicide or other serious symptoms. 29 % of the patients were dissatisfied with the therapy, particularly patients with substance abuse. INTERPRETATION: Psychotherapy with a specialist in private practice with a contract with regional health authorities allows for flexibility with respect to the duration of treatment for patients with a personality disorder. Substance abuse problems and acting-out behaviour present a challenge to treatment which may be difficult to handle in private practice. Treatment in private specialist practice presupposes the possibility of acute hospitalisation or access to other health services in the event of crises and complicating substance abuse.