-
CNS Drugs Oct 2021Borderline personality disorder (BPD) is a debilitating psychiatric disorder that affects 0.4-3.9% of the population in Western countries. Currently, no medications have... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Borderline personality disorder (BPD) is a debilitating psychiatric disorder that affects 0.4-3.9% of the population in Western countries. Currently, no medications have been approved by regulatory agencies for the treatment of BPD. Nevertheless, up to 96% of patients with BPD receive at least one psychotropic medication.
OBJECTIVES
The objective of this systematic review was to assess the general efficacy and the comparative effectiveness of different pharmacological treatments for BPD patients.
METHODS
We conducted systematic literature searches limited to English language in MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and PsycINFO up to April 6, 2021, and searched reference lists of pertinent articles and reviews. Inclusion criteria were (i) patients 13 years or older with a diagnosis of BPD, (ii) treatment with anticonvulsive medications, antidepressants, antipsychotic medications, benzodiazepines, melatonin, opioid agonists or antagonists, or sedative or hypnotic medications for at least 8 weeks, (iii) comparison with placebo or an eligible medication, (iv) assessment of health-relevant outcomes, (v) randomized or non-randomized trials or controlled observational studies. Two investigators independently screened abstracts and full-text articles and graded the certainty of evidence based on the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach. For meta-analyses, we used restricted maximum likelihood random effects models to estimate pooled effects.
RESULTS
Of 12,062 unique records, we included 21 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with data on 1768 participants. Nineteen RCTs compared pharmacotherapies with placebo; two RCTs assessed active treatments head-to-head. Out of 87 medications in use in clinical practice, we found studies on just nine. Overall, the evidence indicates that the efficacy of pharmacotherapies for the treatment of BPD is limited. Second-generation antipsychotics, anticonvulsants, and antidepressants were not able to consistently reduce the severity of BPD. Low-certainty evidence indicates that anticonvulsants can improve specific symptoms associated with BPD such as anger, aggression, and affective lability but the evidence is mostly limited to single studies. Second-generation antipsychotics had little effect on the severity of specific BPD symptoms, but they improved general psychiatric symptoms in patients with BPD.
CONCLUSIONS
Despite the common use of pharmacotherapies for patients with BPD, the available evidence does not support the efficacy of pharmacotherapies alone to reduce the severity of BPD.
REGISTRATION
PROSPERO registration number, CRD42020194098.
Topics: Anticonvulsants; Antidepressive Agents, Second-Generation; Antipsychotic Agents; Borderline Personality Disorder; Humans; Psychotropic Drugs; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 34495494
DOI: 10.1007/s40263-021-00855-4 -
The British Journal of Psychiatry : the... Sep 2022A recently updated Cochrane review supports the efficacy of psychotherapy for borderline personality disorder (BPD). (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
A recently updated Cochrane review supports the efficacy of psychotherapy for borderline personality disorder (BPD).
AIMS
To evaluate the effects of standalone and add-on psychotherapeutic treatments more concisely.
METHOD
We applied the same methods as the 2020 Cochrane review, but focused on adult samples and comparisons of active treatments and unspecific control conditions. Standalone treatments (i.e. necessarily including individual psychotherapy as either the sole or one of several treatment components) and add-on interventions (i.e. complementing any ongoing individual BPD treatment) were analysed separately. Primary outcomes were BPD severity, self-harm, suicide-related outcomes and psychosocial functioning. Secondary outcomes were remaining BPD diagnostic criteria, depression and attrition.
RESULTS
Thirty-one randomised controlled trials totalling 1870 participants were identified. Among standalone treatments, statistically significant effects of low overall certainty were observed for dialectical behaviour therapy (self-harm: standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.54, = 0.006; psychosocial functioning: SMD -0.51, = 0.01) and mentalisation-based treatment (self-harm: risk ratio 0.51, < 0.0007; suicide-related outcomes: risk ratio 0.10, < 0.0001). For adjunctive interventions, moderate-quality evidence of beneficial effects was observed for DBT skills training (BPD severity: SMD -0.66, = 0.002; psychosocial functioning: SMD -0.45, = 0.002), and statistically significant low-certainty evidence was observed for the emotion regulation group (BPD severity: mean difference -8.49, < 0.00001), manual-assisted cognitive therapy (self-harm: mean difference -3.03, = 0.03; suicide-related outcomes: SMD -0.96, = 0.005) and the systems training for emotional predictability and problem-solving (BPD severity: SMD -0.48, = 0.002).
CONCLUSIONS
There is reasonable evidence to conclude that psychotherapeutic interventions are helpful for individuals with BPD. Replication studies are needed to enhance the certainty of findings.
Topics: Adult; Borderline Personality Disorder; Cognitive Behavioral Therapy; Dialectical Behavior Therapy; Humans; Psychotherapy; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Self-Injurious Behavior
PubMed: 35088687
DOI: 10.1192/bjp.2021.204 -
Genetics of borderline personality disorder: systematic review and proposal of an integrative model.Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews Mar 2014Borderline personality disorder (BPD) is one of the most common mental disorders and is characterized by a pervasive pattern of emotional lability, impulsivity,... (Review)
Review
Borderline personality disorder (BPD) is one of the most common mental disorders and is characterized by a pervasive pattern of emotional lability, impulsivity, interpersonal difficulties, identity disturbances, and disturbed cognition. Here, we performed a systematic review of the literature concerning the genetics of BPD, including familial and twin studies, association studies, and gene-environment interaction studies. Moreover, meta-analyses were performed when at least two case-control studies testing the same polymorphism were available. For each gene variant, a pooled odds ratio (OR) was calculated using fixed or random effects models. Familial and twin studies largely support the potential role of a genetic vulnerability at the root of BPD, with an estimated heritability of approximately 40%. Moreover, there is evidence for both gene-environment interactions and correlations. However, association studies for BPD are sparse, making it difficult to draw clear conclusions. According to our meta-analysis, no significant associations were found for the serotonin transporter gene, the tryptophan hydroxylase 1 gene, or the serotonin 1B receptor gene. We hypothesize that such a discrepancy (negative association studies but high heritability of the disorder) could be understandable through a paradigm shift, in which "plasticity" genes (rather than "vulnerability" genes) would be involved. Such a framework postulates a balance between positive and negative events, which interact with plasticity genes in the genesis of BPD.
Topics: Animals; Borderline Personality Disorder; Catechol O-Methyltransferase; Databases, Factual; Dopamine; Gene-Environment Interaction; Genetic Association Studies; Genetic Predisposition to Disease; Genetics; Humans; Serotonin
PubMed: 24456942
DOI: 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2014.01.003 -
JAMA Psychiatry Apr 2017Borderline personality disorder (BPD) is a debilitating condition, but several psychotherapies are considered effective. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
IMPORTANCE
Borderline personality disorder (BPD) is a debilitating condition, but several psychotherapies are considered effective.
OBJECTIVE
To conduct an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials to assess the efficacy of psychotherapies for BPD populations.
DATA SOURCES
Search terms were combined for borderline personality and randomized trials in PubMed, PsycINFO, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (from database inception to November 2015), as well as the reference lists of earlier meta-analyses.
STUDY SELECTION
Included were randomized clinical trials of adults with diagnosed BPD randomized to psychotherapy exclusively or to a control intervention. Study selection differentiated stand-alone designs (in which an independent psychotherapy was compared with control interventions) from add-on designs (in which an experimental intervention added to usual treatment was compared with usual treatment alone).
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS
Data extraction coded characteristics of trials, participants, and interventions and assessed risk of bias using 4 domains of the Cochrane Collaboration Risk of Bias tool (independent extraction by 2 assessors). Outcomes were pooled using a random-effects model. Subgroup and meta-regression analyses were conducted.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
Standardized mean differences (Hedges g) were calculated using all outcomes reported in the trials for borderline symptoms, self-harm, suicide, health service use, and general psychopathology at posttest and follow-up. Differential treatment retention at posttest was analyzed, reporting odds ratios.
RESULTS
Thirty-three trials (2256 participants) were included. For borderline-relevant outcomes combined (symptoms, self-harm, and suicide) at posttest, the investigated psychotherapies were moderately more effective than control interventions in stand-alone designs (g = 0.32; 95% CI, 0.14-0.51) and add-on designs (g = 0.40; 95% CI, 0.15-0.65). Results were similar for other outcomes, including stand-alone designs: self-harm (g = 0.32; 95% CI, 0.09-0.54), suicide (g = 0.44; 95% CI, 0.15-0.74), health service use (g = 0.40; 95% CI, 0.22-0.58), and general psychopathology (g = 0.32; 95% CI, 0.09-0.55), with no differences between design types. There were no significant differences in the odds ratios for treatment retention (1.32; 95% CI, 0.87-2.00 for stand-alone designs and 1.01; 95% CI, 0.55-1.87 for add-on designs). Thirteen trials reported borderline-relevant outcomes at follow-up (g = 0.45; 95% CI, 0.15-0.75). Dialectical behavior therapy (g = 0.34; 95% CI, 0.15-0.53) and psychodynamic approaches (g = 0.41; 95% CI, 0.12-0.69) were the only types of psychotherapies more effective than control interventions. Risk of bias was a significant moderator in subgroup and meta-regression analyses (slope β = -0.16; 95% CI, -0.29 to -0.03; P = .02). Publication bias was persistent, particularly for follow-up.
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
Psychotherapies, most notably dialectical behavior therapy and psychodynamic approaches, are effective for borderline symptoms and related problems. Nonetheless, effects are small, inflated by risk of bias and publication bias, and particularly unstable at follow-up.
Topics: Behavior Therapy; Borderline Personality Disorder; Humans; Psychotherapy; Psychotherapy, Psychodynamic; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Self-Injurious Behavior; Suicide; Treatment Outcome; Suicide Prevention
PubMed: 28249086
DOI: 10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2016.4287 -
PloS One 2019Maladaptive parenting (including childhood maltreatment, abuse and neglect) has been implicated in the scientific literature exploring the aetiology of personality... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES
Maladaptive parenting (including childhood maltreatment, abuse and neglect) has been implicated in the scientific literature exploring the aetiology of personality disorder, particularly borderline personality disorder (BPD). Our primary objective was to summarise the evidence on the relationship between parenting and personality disorder, assisting clinical decision-makers to translate this research into clinical policy and practice.
METHODS
We conducted an overview of systematic reviews that assessed individuals with personality disorder pathology for experiences of maladaptive parenting, compared to psychiatric or healthy comparisons/controls, and the impact on psychopathological and relational outcomes. Systematic literature searches were conducted in Scopus, Web of Science, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and by hand in August 2018. Methodological quality was assessed using the CASP systematic review checklist, and results were qualitatively synthesised. A pre-determined protocol was registered in Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO 2019:CRD42018096177).
RESULTS
Of the 312 identified records, 293 abstracts were screened, 36 full-text articles were retrieved and eight systematic reviews met pre-determined criteria for qualitative synthesises. The majority of studies reported outcomes related to BPD (n = 7), and study design, methodology and quality varied. Within the eight systematic reviews there were 211 primary studies, of which 140 (66.35%) met eligibility criteria for inclusion in this overview. Eligible primary studies reported on 121,895 adult, child/adolescent and parent-offspring participants, with most studies focused on borderline personality pathology (n = 100, 71.43%). Study design and methodology also varied for these studies. Overall, five systematic reviews overwhelming found that maladaptive parenting was a psychosocial risk factor for the development of borderline personality pathology, and three studies found that borderline personality pathology was associated with maladaptive parenting, and negative offspring and parenting-offspring outcomes.
CONCLUSIONS
In light of these findings, we recommend greater emphasis on parenting in clinical practice and the development of parenting interventions for individuals with personality disorder. However, our understanding is limited by the heterogeneity and varying quality of the evidence, and as such, future research utilising more rigorous research methodology is needed.
Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Borderline Personality Disorder; Child; Child Abuse; Emotions; Female; Humans; Mental Health; Parenting; Personality Disorders; Risk Factors
PubMed: 31574104
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0223038 -
The Australian and New Zealand Journal... Feb 2023Autism spectrum disorders and personality disorders are spectrum conditions with shared clinical features. Despite similarities, previous attempts to synthesise... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVES
Autism spectrum disorders and personality disorders are spectrum conditions with shared clinical features. Despite similarities, previous attempts to synthesise literature on co-existing prevalence and shared traits have employed a unidirectional focus, assessing personality characteristics of individuals with an autism spectrum disorder diagnosis. Here, we assess the prevalence of autism spectrum disorder diagnosis and/or traits among persons diagnosed with a personality disorder.
METHODS
We systematically reviewed the English-language literature following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, according to a pre-registered protocol (PROSPERO: CRD 42021264106). Peer-reviewed quantitative studies reporting the prevalence of autism spectrum disorder diagnosis or traits in persons with an established personality disorder diagnosis were included. Studies were critically appraised using the Appraisal tool for Cross-Sectional Studies.
RESULTS
Fifteen studies were identified, including 72,902 participants (median: 48, interquartile range: 30-77). Diagnoses included borderline, schizotypal and obsessive-compulsive personality disorders, and cohorts with unspecified personality disorder diagnoses. There was significant heterogeneity in diagnostic methodology and assessment tools used. We identified preliminary evidence of an increased prevalence of co-existing autism spectrum disorder diagnosis and traits among those diagnosed with a personality disorder, although significant limitations of the literature were identified.
CONCLUSION
Our research suggests clinicians should consider conducting a careful developmental assessment when assessing service-users with possible or confirmed personality disorder. Future research directions may include larger studies featuring clinical control groups, an exploration of shared and differentiating behavioural-cognitive features of the two conditions, and investigation into potentially shared aetiological factors. Research investigating demographic factors that may contribute to potential diagnostic overshadowing would also be welcomed.
Topics: Humans; Adult; Adolescent; Autism Spectrum Disorder; Prevalence; Cross-Sectional Studies; Personality Disorders; Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder
PubMed: 35986511
DOI: 10.1177/00048674221114603 -
Psychological Medicine Jun 2023A broad range of psychotherapies have been proposed and evaluated in the treatment of borderline personality disorder (BPD), but the question which specific type of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Which psychotherapy is most effective and acceptable in the treatment of adults with a (sub)clinical borderline personality disorder? A systematic review and network meta-analysis.
A broad range of psychotherapies have been proposed and evaluated in the treatment of borderline personality disorder (BPD), but the question which specific type of psychotherapy is most effective remains unanswered. In this study, two network meta-analyses (NMAs) were conducted investigating the comparative effectiveness of psychotherapies on (1) BPD severity and (2) suicidal behaviour (combined rate). Study drop-out was included as a secondary outcome. Six databases were searched until 21 January 2022, including RCTs on the efficacy of any psychotherapy in adults (⩾18 years) with a diagnosis of (sub)clinical BPD. Data were extracted using a predefined table format. PROSPERO ID:CRD42020175411. In our study, a total of 43 studies ( = 3273) were included. We found significant differences between several active comparisons in the treatment of (sub)clinical BPD, however, these findings were based on very few trials and should therefore be interpreted with caution. Some therapies were more efficacious compared to GT or TAU. Furthermore, some treatments more than halved the risk of attempted suicide and committed suicide (combined rate), reporting RRs around 0.5 or lower, however, these RRs were not statistically significantly better compared to other therapies or to TAU. Study drop-out significantly differed between some treatments. In conclusion, no single treatment seems to be the best choice to treat people with BPD compared to other treatments. Nevertheless, psychotherapies for BPD are perceived as first-line treatments, and should therefore be investigated further on their long-term effectiveness, preferably in head-to-head trials. DBT was the best connected treatment, providing solid evidence of its effectiveness.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Network Meta-Analysis; Borderline Personality Disorder; Psychotherapy; Suicide, Attempted; Suicidal Ideation; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 37203447
DOI: 10.1017/S0033291723000685 -
CNS Spectrums Dec 2022A number of recent investigations have focused on the neurobiology of obsessive-compulsive personality disorder (OCPD). However, there have been few reviews of this... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
A number of recent investigations have focused on the neurobiology of obsessive-compulsive personality disorder (OCPD). However, there have been few reviews of this literature with no detailed model proposed. We therefore undertook a systematic review of these investigations, aiming to map the available evidence and investigate whether it is possible to formulate a detailed model of the neurobiology of OCPD.
METHODS
OCPD can be considered from both categorical and dimensional perspectives. An electronic search was therefore conducted using terms that would address not only OCPD as a category, but also related constructs, such as perfectionism, that would capture research on neuropsychology, neuroimaging, neurochemistry, and neurogenetics.
RESULTS
A total of 1059 articles were retrieved, with 87 ultimately selected for abstract screening, resulting in a final selection of 49 articles focusing on neurobiological investigations relevant to OCPD. Impaired executive function and cognitive inflexibility are common neuropsychological traits in this condition, and suggest that obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) and OCPD may lie on a continuum. However, neuroimaging studies in OCPD indicate the involvement of specific neurocircuitry, including the precuneus and amygdala, and so suggest that OCD and OCPD may have important differences. Although OCPD has a heritable component, we found no well-powered genetic studies of OCPD.
CONCLUSION
Although knowledge in this area has advanced, there are insufficient data on which to base a comprehensive model of the neurobiology of OCPD. Given the clinical importance of OCPD, further work to understand the mechanisms that underpin this condition is warranted.
Topics: Humans; Compulsive Personality Disorder; Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder; Neurobiology
PubMed: 34378500
DOI: 10.1017/S1092852921000754 -
The British Journal of Psychiatry : the... Feb 2020Personality disorders are now internationally recognised as a mental health priority. Nevertheless, there are no systematic reviews examining the global prevalence of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Personality disorders are now internationally recognised as a mental health priority. Nevertheless, there are no systematic reviews examining the global prevalence of personality disorders.
AIMS
To calculate the worldwide prevalence of personality disorders and examine whether rates vary between high-income countries and low- and middle-income countries (LMICs).
METHOD
We systematically searched PsycINFO, MEDLINE, EMBASE and PubMed from January 1980 to May 2018 to identify articles reporting personality disorder prevalence rates in community populations (PROSPERO registration number: CRD42017065094).
RESULTS
A total of 46 studies (from 21 different countries spanning 6 continents) satisfied inclusion criteria. The worldwide pooled prevalence of any personality disorder was 7.8% (95% CI 6.1-9.5). Rates were greater in high-income countries (9.6%, 95% CI 7.9-11.3%) compared with LMICs (4.3%, 95% CI 2.6-6.1%). In univariate meta-regressions, significant heterogeneity was partly attributable to study design (two-stage v. one-stage assessment), county income (high-income countries v. LMICs) and interview administration (clinician v. trained graduate). In multiple meta-regression analysis, study design remained a significant predictor of heterogeneity. Global rates of cluster A, B and C personality disorders were 3.8% (95% CI 3.2, 4.4%), 2.8% (1.6, 3.7%) and 5.0% (4.2, 5.9%).
CONCLUSIONS
Personality disorders are prevalent globally. Nevertheless, pooled prevalence rates should be interpreted with caution due to high levels of heterogeneity. More large-scale studies with standardised methodologies are now needed to increase our understanding of population needs and regional variations.
Topics: Developed Countries; Developing Countries; Humans; Income; Mental Health; Personality Disorders; Prevalence
PubMed: 31298170
DOI: 10.1192/bjp.2019.166 -
Journal of Clinical Psychology Apr 2021The Enneagram is a typology that many clients use to understand their personality and interpersonal patterns, despite some concerns about its validity. Thus, the purpose... (Review)
Review
The Enneagram is a typology that many clients use to understand their personality and interpersonal patterns, despite some concerns about its validity. Thus, the purpose of this review is to provide a comprehensive and clinician-friendly review of the extant empirical work on the Enneagram. After reviewing 104 independent samples, we found mixed evidence of reliability and validity. In terms of strengths, some factor analytic work has shown partial alignment with prior theorizing, and subscales show theory-consistent relationships with other constructs such as the Big 5. Also, several studies found the Enneagram was helpful for personal/spiritual growth. However, factor analytic work has typically found fewer than nine factors, and no work has used clustering techniques to derive the nine types. Also, there is little research supporting secondary aspects of Enneagram theory, such as wings and intertype movement. We conclude by highlighting directions for future research and implications for clinical practice.
Topics: Humans; Personality; Personality Disorders; Reproducibility of Results; Spirituality
PubMed: 33332604
DOI: 10.1002/jclp.23097