Maladaptive defense mechanisms moderate treatment outcome in 6 months versus 12 months dialectical-behavior therapy for borderline personality disorder.

OBJECTIVE: We investigated whether defense mechanisms in patients with borderline personality disorder (BPD) predict treatment response of dialectical behavior therapy (DBT) and whether they moderate outcome in different treatment lengths. METHOD: We analyzed a subsample of 60 outpatients with BPD, randomized into either 6 (n = 30) or 12 (n = 30) months of DBT. The average level of defensive adaptiveness, assessed with observer-rated overall defensive functioning (ODF) and "immature" (i.e., maladaptive) defenses were used as predictors and moderators of self-reported frequency of self-harm. We conducted a Generalized Linear Mixed Model (GLMM). RESULTS: A lower ODF at treatment onset predicted smaller reductions in self-harm, irrespective of treatment length (IRR = 0.92, 95% CI = [0.86, 0.99], p = .020). Lower order "immature" ("major image distorting") defenses showed significantly smaller (IRR = 1.13, 95% CI = [1.06, 1.21], p < .001) and higher order "immature" ("minor image distorting") defenses showed significantly larger (IRR = .91, 95% CI = [.85, .97], p = .006) reductions in self harm in the 6-month but not in the 12-month treatment. CONCLUSION: Even though the results have to be regarded as preliminary due to the small sample size, findings might indicate that patients with BPD and lower average defensive adaptiveness may benefit from individualized treatment plans including specific interventions targeting defense function.

Pretreatment cognitive performance is associated with differential self-harm outcomes in 6 v. 12-months of dialectical behavior therapy for borderline personality disorder.

BACKGROUND: Recent findings suggest that brief dialectical behavior therapy (DBT) for borderline personality disorder is effective for reducing self-harm, but it remains unknown which patients are likely to improve in brief v. 12 months of DBT. Research is needed to identify patient characteristics that moderate outcomes. Here, we characterized changes in cognition across brief DBT (DBT-6) v. a standard 12-month course (DBT-12) and examined whether cognition predicted self-harm outcomes in each arm. METHODS: In this secondary analysis of 240 participants in the FASTER study (NCT02387736), cognitive measures were administered at pre-treatment, after 6 months, and at 12 months. Self-harm was assessed from pre-treatment to 2-year follow-up. Multilevel models characterized changes in cognition across treatment. Generalized estimating equations examined whether pre-treatment cognitive performance predicted self-harm outcomes in each arm. RESULTS: Cognitive performance improved in both arms after 6 months of treatment, with no between-arm differences at 12-months. Pre-treatment inhibitory control was associated with different self-harm outcomes in DBT-6 v. DBT-12. For participants with average inhibitory control, self-harm outcomes were significantly better when assigned to DBT-12, relative to DBT-6, at 9-18 months after initiating treatment. In contrast, participants with poor inhibitory control showed better self-harm outcomes when assigned to brief DBT-6 v. DBT-12, at 12-24 months after initiating treatment. CONCLUSIONS: This work represents an initial step toward an improved understanding of patient profiles that are best suited to briefer v. standard 12 months of DBT, but observed effects should be replicated in a waitlist-controlled study to confirm that they were treatment-specific.

The Effectiveness of 6 versus 12 Months of Dialectical Behavior Therapy for Borderline Personality Disorder: A Noninferiority Randomized Clinical Trial.

INTRODUCTION: Evidence-based psychotherapies for borderline personality disorder (BPD) are lengthy, posing a barrier to their access. Brief psychotherapy may achieve comparable outcomes to long-term psychotherapy for BPD. Evidence is needed regarding the comparative effectiveness of short- versus long-term psychotherapy for BPD. OBJECTIVE: The aim was to determine if 6 months of Dialectical Behavior Therapy (DBT) is noninferior to 12 months of DBT in terms of clinical effectiveness. METHODS: This two-arm, single-blinded, randomized controlled noninferiority trial with suicidal or self-harming patients with BPD was conducted at two sites in Canada. Participants (N = 240, M (SD)age = 28.27 (8.62), 79% females) were randomized to receive either 6 (DBT-6) or 12 months (DBT-12) of comprehensive DBT. Masked assessors obtained measures of clinical effectiveness at baseline and every 3 months, ending at month 24. DBT-6 and DBT-12 were outpatient treatments consisting of weekly individual therapy sessions, weekly DBT skills training group sessions, telephone consultation as needed, and weekly therapist consultation team meetings. RESULTS: The noninferiority hypothesis was supported for the primary outcome, total self-harm (6 months: margin = -1.94, Mdiff [95% CI] = 0.16 [-0.14, 0.46]; 12 months: margin = -1.47, Mdiff [95% CI] = 0.04 [-0.17, 0.23]; 24 months: margin = -1.25, Mdiff [95% CI] = 0.12 [-0.02, 0.36]). Results also supported noninferiority of DBT-6 for general psychopathology and coping skills at 24 months. Furthermore, DBT-6 participants showed more rapid reductions in BPD symptoms and general psychopathology. There were no between-group differences in dropout rates. CONCLUSIONS: The noninferiority of a briefer yet comprehensive treatment for BPD has potential to reduce barriers to treatment access.

Predictors of Dropout From a 20-Week Dialectical Behavior Therapy Skills Group for Suicidal Behaviors and Borderline Personality Disorder.

Treatment dropout among individuals with borderline personality disorder (BPD) is associated with negative psychosocial outcomes. Identifying predictors of dropout among this population is critical to understanding how to improve treatment retention. The present study extends the current literature by examining both static and dynamic predictors of dropout. Chronically suicidal outpatients diagnosed with BPD (N = 42) were randomly assigned to a 20-week dialectical behavior therapy (DBT) skills training group. Static and dynamic predictors were assessed at baseline, 5, 10, 15, 20 weeks, and 3 months post-intervention. A post-hoc two-stage logistic regression analysis was conducted to predict dropout propensity. Receiving disability benefits at baseline and decreases in mindfulness were associated with significantly increased probability of dropout. Clinicians working with chronically self-harming outpatients diagnosed with BPD would benefit from prioritizing clinical interventions that enhance mindfulness in order to decrease dropout propensity.

The independent roles of mindfulness and distress tolerance in treatment outcomes in dialectical behavior therapy skills training.

Despite research supporting the effectiveness of dialectical behavior therapy (DBT) for borderline personality disorder (BPD), few studies have examined how DBT leads to clinical change. DBT is theorized to lead to improved clinical outcomes by enhancing the capacity for emotion regulation, including improvement in skills (e.g., mindfulness and distress tolerance) for managing emotional distress and impulsive behaviors. Therefore, the aim of this study was to test whether improvements in mindfulness and distress tolerance indirectly affect the relationship between DBT skills training and clinical outcomes. The sample consists of 84 patients diagnosed with BPD who were enrolled in a randomized controlled trial comparing 20 weeks of DBT-skills group (DBT-S) to an active waitlist control. Mindfulness and distress tolerance were assessed at baseline and at the end of the 20 weeks. BPD symptoms, general psychiatric symptoms, and social adjustment were assessed at the end of 20 weeks and combined into a latent variable representing a broad assessment of general psychopathology. Relative to the waitlist control group, improvements in mindfulness and distress tolerance each independently indirectly affected the relationship between DBT-S and posttreatment general psychopathology. Findings suggest that DBT-S exerts its effects on outcomes through improvements in mindfulness and distress tolerance. These findings support the significance of mindfulness and distress tolerance in DBT-S for BPD. Limitations, future directions, and clinical implications are discussed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

Old and new ideas for data screening and assumption testing for exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis.

We provide a basic review of the data screening and assumption testing issues relevant to exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis along with practical advice for conducting analyses that are sensitive to these concerns. Historically, factor analysis was developed for explaining the relationships among many continuous test scores, which led to the expression of the common factor model as a multivariate linear regression model with observed, continuous variables serving as dependent variables, and unobserved factors as the independent, explanatory variables. Thus, we begin our paper with a review of the assumptions for the common factor model and data screening issues as they pertain to the factor analysis of continuous observed variables. In particular, we describe how principles from regression diagnostics also apply to factor analysis. Next, because modern applications of factor analysis frequently involve the analysis of the individual items from a single test or questionnaire, an important focus of this paper is the factor analysis of items. Although the traditional linear factor model is well-suited to the analysis of continuously distributed variables, commonly used item types, including Likert-type items, almost always produce dichotomous or ordered categorical variables. We describe how relationships among such items are often not well described by product-moment correlations, which has clear ramifications for the traditional linear factor analysis. An alternative, non-linear factor analysis using polychoric correlations has become more readily available to applied researchers and thus more popular. Consequently, we also review the assumptions and data-screening issues involved in this method. Throughout the paper, we demonstrate these procedures using an historic data set of nine cognitive ability variables.