BackgroundElectronic health (eHealth) programs have been found to be effective in treating many psychological conditions. However, regarding borderline personality disorder (BPD), only a few eHealth programs have been tested, involving small interventions based on the dialectical behavior therapy treatment approach. We investigated priovi, a program based on the schema therapy (ST) approach. priovi is considerably more comprehensive than prior programs, offering broad psychoeducation content and many therapeutic exercises.ObjectiveWe tested the acceptability and feasibility of priovi in 14 patients with BPD as an add-on to individual face-to-face ST.MethodsPatients received weekly individual ST and used priovi over a period of 12 months. We assessed BPD symptom severity using self-reported and interview-based measures. Qualitative interviews were conducted with both patients and therapists to assess their experiences with priovi.ResultsBPD symptoms improved significantly (Cohen d=1.0). Overall, qualitative data showed that priovi was positively received by both patients and therapists. Some exercises provoked mild anxiety; however, no serious threat to safety was detected.Conclusionspriovi is a potentially helpful and safe tool that could support individual ST. It needs to be further tested in a randomized controlled study.Trial RegistrationGerman Clinical Trials Register DRKS00011538; https://www.drks.de/drks_web/navigate.do? navigationId=trial.HTML&TRIAL_ID=DRKS00011538 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/74jb0AgV8)
BackgroundBorderline Personality Disorder (BPD) is a severe mental illness that is associated with low quality of life, low psychosocial functioning, and high societal costs. Treatments for BPD have improved in the last decades. Dialectical behavior therapy (DBT) and Schema therapy (ST) have demonstrated efficacy in reducing BPD symptoms and costs. However, research has not compared these two treatment approaches. In addition, there is a lack of ‘real world studies’ that replicate positive findings in regular mental healthcare settings. Thus, the PROgrams for Borderline Personality Disorder (PRO*BPD) study will compare the (cost-) effectiveness of DBT and ST in structured outpatient treatment programs in the routine clinical setting of an outpatient clinic.Methods/DesignWe aim to recruit 160 BPD patients, who will be randomly assigned to either DBT or ST. In both conditions, patients receive one group therapy and one individual therapy session/week for a maximum of 18 months. Both treatment programs have similar frameworks, which guarantee clinical equipoise. The primary outcome is a reduction of BPD-symptoms. Also, the costs related to BPD are assessed and an economic evaluation is performed from a societal perspective. Secondary outcomes examine other measures of BPD-typical and general psychopathology, comorbidity, quality of life, psychosocial functioning and participation. Data are collected prior to the beginning therapy and every six months until the end of therapy, as well as at six months, one year and two years of follow-up after the end of therapy. Finally, we conduct a qualitative study to understand patients’ experiences with the two methods.DiscussionThe PRO*BPD study is the first randomized trial to compare the (cost-) effectiveness of DBT and ST. By examining the clinical effectiveness of a broad spectrum of outcome parameters, conducting an economic evaluation and assessing patients’ experiences, this study will significantly advance our knowledge on psychotherapy for BPD and will provide insight into the treatment approaches that should be offered to different BPD patients from clinical, economic and stakeholder’s perspectives.Trial registrationGerman Clinical Trial Register, DRKS00011534, Date of registration: 11/01/2017, retrospectively registered.
Patients suffering from PDD comorbid with AD might experience greater benefit when they are treated with specific as opposed to unspecific therapy. Analyzing subgroups of patients with PDD seems worthwhile to improve treatment effectiveness even within disorder-specific treatment programms.
According to previous research, borderline personality disorder (BPD) is associated with high cost-of-illness. However, there is still a shortage of cost-of-illness-studies assessing costs from a broad societal perspective, including direct and indirect costs. Further, there are considerable differences in the results among the existing studies. In the present study, 167 German men and women seeking specialized outpatient treatment for BPD were included. We assessed societal cost-of-illness bottom-up through structured face-to-face interviews and encompassed a wide range of cost components. All costs were calculated for the 2015 price level. Cost-of-illness amounted to € 31,130 per patient and year preceding disorder-specific outpatient treatment. € 17,044 (54.8%) were direct costs that were mostly related to hospital treatment. Indirect costs amounted to € 14,086 (45.2%). Within indirect costs, costs related to work disability were the most crucial cost driver. The present study underlines the tremendous economic burden of BPD. According to the present study, both the direct and indirect costs are of significant importance for the societal costs associated with BPD. Besides the need for more disorder-specific treatment facilities for men and women with BPD, we assume that education and employment are topics that should be specifically targeted and individually supported at an early stage of treatment.Trial Registration: German Clinical Trial Registration, DRKS00011534, Date of Registration: 11/01/2017, retrospectively registered.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.