Borderline personality disorder should no longer be associated with high rates of dropout from treatment. However, the substantial variation in completion rates between studies remains unexplained. Research on the psychological processes involved in dropping out of treatment could further improve dropout rates.

Background: A primary goal of dialectical behaviour therapy (DBT) is to reduce self-harm, but findings from empirical studies are inconclusive. The aim of this study was to assess the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of DBT in reducing self-harm in patients with personality disorder. Methods: Participants with a personality disorder and at least 5 days of self-harm in the previous year were randomised to receive 12 months of either DBT or treatment as usual (TAU). The primary outcome was the frequency of days with self-harm; secondary outcomes included borderline personality disorder symptoms, general psychiatric symptoms, subjective quality of life, and costs of care. Results: Forty patients each were randomised to DBT and TAU. In an intention-to-treat analysis, there was a statistically significant treatment by time interaction for self-harm (incidence rate ratio 0.91, 95% CI 0.89–0.92, p < 0.001). For every 2 months spent in DBT, the risk of self-harm decreased by 9% relative to TAU. There was no evidence of differences on any secondary outcomes. The economic analysis revealed a total cost of a mean of 5,685 GBP (6,786 EUR) in DBT compared to a mean of 3,754 GBP (4,481 EUR) in TAU, but the difference was not significant (95% CI –603 to 4,599 GBP). Forty-eight per cent of patients completed DBT. They had a greater reduction in self-harm compared to dropouts (incidence rate ratio 0.78, 95% CI 0.76–0.80, p < 0.001). Conclusions: DBT can be effective in reducing self-harm in patients with personality disorder, possibly incurring higher total treatment costs. The effect is stronger in those who complete treatment. Future research should explore how to improve treatment adherence.

BackgroundSymptom improvement in Borderline Personality Disorder (BPD) is more common than previously hypothesised. However, it remains unclear whether it reflects service users' personal goals of recovery. The present study aimed to explore what service users with BPD view as recovery.Methods48 service users were recruited from secondary mental health services and their views on their personal goals and the meaning of recovery were explored in in-depth semi-structured interviews. The study drew on grounded theory and thematic analysis.ResultsService users believed that recovery involved developing self-acceptance and self-confidence, gaining control over emotions, improving relationships, employment, and making progress in symptoms like suicidality and self-harming. They felt that psychotherapies for BPD often had an extreme focus on specific areas, like self-harming or relationships, and that some of their goals were neglected. Although full recovery was seen as a distant goal, interviewees felt that they could learn how to deal with their problems in more effective ways and make meaningful progress in their lives.ConclusionsSpecialist therapies for BPD explicitly address some of the recovery goals that are important to service users, whereas other goals are only indirectly or poorly addressed. Professionals might need to work with service users towards devising comprehensive individualised case formulations, including all treatment targets that are important to service users, their priorities, and long-term plans on how their targets might be met and which services might be involved.

No abstract

Aims and method We aimed to evaluate the availability and nature of services for people affected by personality disorder in England by conducting a survey of English National Health Service (NHS) mental health trusts and independent organisations.Results In England, 84% of organisations reported having at least one dedicated personality disorder service. This represents a fivefold increase compared with a 2002 survey. However, only 55% of organisations reported that patients had equal access across localities to these dedicated services. Dedicated services commonly had good levels of service use and carer involvement, and engagement in education, research and training. However, a wider multidisciplinary team and a greater number of biopsychosocial interventions were available through generic services.Clinical implications There has been a substantial increase in service provision for people affected by personality disorder, but continued variability in the availability of services is apparent and it remains unclear whether quality of care has improved.

BackgroundDialectical behaviour therapy (DBT) and mentalisation-based therapy (MBT) are both widely used evidence-based treatments for borderline personality disorder (BPD), yet a head-to-head comparison of outcomes has never been conducted. The present study therefore aimed to compare the clinical outcomes of DBT v. MBT in patients with BPD.MethodsA non-randomised comparison of clinical outcomes in N = 90 patients with BPD receiving either DBT or MBT over a 12-month period.ResultsAfter adjusting for potentially confounding differences between participants, participants receiving DBT reported a significantly steeper decline over time in incidents of self-harm (adjusted IRR = 0.93, 95% CI 0.87–0.99, p = 0.02) and in emotional dysregulation (adjusted β = −1.94, 95% CI −3.37 to −0.51, p < 0.01) than participants receiving MBT. Differences in treatment dropout and use of crisis services were no longer significant after adjusting for confounding, and there were no significant differences in BPD symptoms or interpersonal problems.ConclusionsWithin this sample of people using specialist personality disorder treatment services, reductions in self-harm and improvements in emotional regulation at 12 months were greater amongst those receiving DBT than amongst those receiving MBT. Experimental studies assessing outcomes beyond 12 months are needed to examine whether these findings represent differences in the clinical effectiveness of these therapies.

Background and Objectives: Dialectical behaviour therapy (DBT) trains participants to use behavioural skills for managing their emotions. The study aimed to evaluate whether skills use is associated with positive treatment outcomes independently of treatment processes that are common across different therapeutic models.Method: Use of the DBT skills and three common treatment processes (therapeutic alliance, treatment credibility and self-efficacy) were assessed every 2 months for a year in 70 individuals with borderline personality disorder receiving DBT. Mixed-multilevel modelling was used to determine the association of these factors with frequency of self-harm and with treatment dropout.Results: Participants who used the skills less often at any timepoint were more likely to drop out of DBT in the subsequent two months, independently of their self-efficacy, therapeutic alliance or perceived treatment credibility. More frequent use of the DBT skills and higher self-efficacy were each independently associated with less frequent concurrent self-harm.Treatment credibility and the alliance were not independently associated with self-harm or treatment dropout.Limitations: The skills use measure could not be applied to a control group who did not receive DBT. The sample size was insufficient for structural equation modelling.Conclusion: Practising the DBT skills and building an increased sense of self-efficacy may be important and partially independent treatment processes in dialectical behaviour therapy.However, the direction of the association between these variables and self-harm requires further evaluation.

PurposeContinuous observation of psychiatric inpatients aims to protect those who pose an acute risk of harm to self or others, but involves intrusive privacy restrictions. Initiating, conducting and ending continuous observation requires complex decision-making about keeping patients safe whilst protecting their privacy. There is little published guidance about how to balance privacy and safety concerns, and how staff and patients negotiate this in practice is unknown. To inform best practice, the present study, therefore, aimed to understand how staff and patients experience negotiating the balance between privacy and safety during decision-making about continuous observation.MethodsThematic analysis of qualitative interviews with thirty-one inpatient psychiatric staff and twenty-eight inpatients.ResultsMost patients struggled with the lack of privacy but valued feeling safe during continuous observation. Staff and patients linked good decision-making to using continuous observation for short periods and taking positive risks, understanding and collaborating with the patient, and working together as a supportive staff team. Poor decision-making was linked to insufficient consideration of observation’s iatrogenic potential, insufficient collaboration with patients, and the stressful impact on staff of conducting observations and managing risk.ConclusionsBest practice in decision-making about continuous observation may be facilitated by making decisions in collaboration with patients, and by staff supporting each-other in positive risk-taking. To achieve truly patient-centred decision-making, decisions about observation should not be influenced by staff’s own stress levels. To address the negative impact of staff stress on decision-making, it may be helpful to improve staff training, education and support structures.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s00127-017-1338-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.