Search

Introduction: Borderline personality disorder (BPD) is a severe and prevalent psychiatric disorder. Mentalization-based therapy (MBT) is an evidence-based intervention for BPD, and several countries offer treatment programs for BPD lasting for years, which is resource demanding. No previous trial has compared short-term with long-term MBT. Objective: The aim of the study was to assess the efficacy and safety of short-term versus long-term MBT for outpatients with BPD. Methods: Adult outpatients (≥18 years) with subthreshold or diagnosed BPD were randomly assigned (1:1) to short-term MBT (5 months) or long-term MBT (14 months). The primary outcome was BPD symptoms assessed with the Zanarini Rating Scale for Borderline Personality Disorder. Secondary outcomes were functional impairment, quality of life, global functioning, and severe self-harm. All outcomes were primarily assessed at 16 months after randomization. This trial was prospectively registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03677037. Results: Between October 4, 2018, and December 3, 2020, we randomly assigned 166 participants to short-term MBT (n = 84) or long-term MBT (n = 82). Regression analyses showed no evidence of a difference when assessing BPD symptoms (MD 0.99; 95% CI: −1.06 to 3.03; p = 0.341), level of functioning (MD 1.44; 95% CI: −1.43 to 4.32; p = 0.321), quality of life (MD −0.91; 95% CI: −4.62 to 2.79; p = 0.626), global functioning (MD −2.25; 95% CI: −6.70 to 2.20; p = 0.318), or severe self-harm (RR 1.37; 95% CI: 0.70–2.84; p = 0.335). More participants in the long-term MBT group had a serious adverse event compared with short-term MBT (RR 1.63; 95% CI: 0.94–3.07; p = 0.088), primarily driven by a difference in psychiatric hospitalizations (RR 2.03; 95% CI: 0.99–5.09; p = 0.056). Conclusion: Long-term MBT did not lead to lower levels of BPD symptoms, nor did it influence any of the secondary outcomes compared with short-term MBT. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A review of the history of the University Clinic at the Department of Psychology, University of Copenhagen, Denmark, is presented. The history of the Clinic can be viewed as a case illustrating more general trends at university clinics in Western societies. The history is viewed in relation to key points in the development of psychological science in general, with a special focus on clinical psychology and the emergence of social needs for clinical psychological practice in the wake of World War II. The so-called "scientist–practitioner" model is introduced, and it is argued that the higher priority given to research today is double-edged, entailing on the one hand the possibility of contributing to the development of research-based clinical theories and practices on a high level and on the other hand the risks of undermining university clinics tradition for clinical psychological practice and education. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: In this paper, we test the reliability and validity of two novel ways of assessing mentalizing in the therapy context: the Reflective Functioning scale (RF) applied to code psychotherapy transcripts (In-session RF), and the Exploring scale of the Patient Attachment Coding System (PACS), which measures in-session autonomy and is linked with secure attachment in psychotherapy. Method: Before treatment, 160 patients in different types of psychotherapy and from three different countries were administered the Adult Attachment Interview (AAI), which was rated with the RF scale. One early psychotherapy session for each patient was independently rated with the In-session RF scale and with the PACS Exploring scale. Results: Both scales were found to be reliable and to have concurrent validity with the RF scale rated on the AAI, with the PACS Exploring scale found to be a better predictor of RF on the AAI. Conclusions: These results suggest that the PACS Exploring scale might be a practical method for assessing RF in psychotherapy research and a way for researchers and clinicians to track patients' RF on an ongoing basis. These results also provide information regarding the ways in which differences in RF manifest during psychotherapy sessions. Clinical or methodological significance of this article Researchers and clinicians can assess patients' mentalizing based on any single psychotherapy transcript, in many therapeutic modalities The Exploring scale of the Patient Attachment Coding System can yield a reliable measure of reflective functioning based on any single psychotherapy transcript, in many therapeutic modalities Client differences in mentalizing manifest in part independently of the therapist's contributions [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Psychotherapy Research is the property of Routledge and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Psychotherapy Research is the property of Routledge and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)