Improvement of personality functioning among people treated within personality disorder mental health services. A longitudinal, observational study.

Objective: Evidence-based personality disorder (PD) treatments are dominated by interventions targeting Borderline PD, although clinical populations characteristically include different PD features and severity. Personality functioning is a new concept intended to capture common features across PDs. This study aimed to investigate longitudinal improvement of personality functioning in a clinical sample assigned to PD treatment. Method: An observational, large, longitudinal study of patients in PD treatments on specialist mental health service levels (N = 1,051). DSM-5 PDs were systematically assessed on referral. Personality functioning was repeatedly assessed (LPFS-BF-2.0), supplemented by symptom distress (anxiety: PHQ-GAD-7, depression: PHQ-9), and social/occupational activity (WSAS, work/study activity). Statistics were linear mixed models. Results: Thirty per cent had personality difficulties below PD threshold. Among PDs, 31% had Borderline (BPD), 39% Avoidant (AvPD), 15% not otherwise specified, 15% other PDs, and 24% > one PD. More severe initial LPFS-BF was associated with younger age, presence of PD and increasing number of total PD criteria. Across PD conditions, LPFS-BF, PHQ-9 and GAD-7 improved significantly (overall effect size 0.9). Mean duration of PD treatment was 15 (SD 9) months. Drop-out rates were low (12%). LPFS-BF improvement-rates were higher for BPD. Younger age was moderately associated with slower PHQ-9 improvement. Work/study activity was initially poor, poorer levels associated with AvPD and younger age, and improvement was non-significant across PD conditions. AvPD was associated with slower WSAS improvement-rates. Conclusion: Personality functioning improved across PD conditions. The results highlight BPD improvements. The study points to challenges concerning AvPD treatment, poor occupational activity and age-related differences.

The design of the MBT-G adherence and quality scale.

Few group psychotherapy studies focus on therapists' interventions, and instruments that can measure group psychotherapy treatment fidelity are scarce. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the reliability of the Mentalization-based Group Therapy Adherence and Quality Scale (MBT-G-AQS), which is a 19-item scale developed to measure adherence and quality in mentalization-based group therapy (MBT-G). Eight MBT groups and eight psychodynamic groups (a total of 16 videotaped therapy sessions) were rated independently by five raters. All groups were long-term, outpatient psychotherapy groups with 1.5 hours weekly sessions. Data were analysed by a Generalizability Study (G-study and D-study). The generalizability models included analyses of reliability for different numbers of raters. The global (overall) ratings for adherence and quality showed high to excellent reliability for all numbers of raters (the reliability by use of five raters was 0.97 for adherence and 0.96 for quality). The mean reliability for all 19 items for a single rater was 0.57 (item range 0.26-0.86) for adherence, and 0.62 (item range 0.26-0.83) for quality. The reliability for two raters obtained mean absolute G-coefficients on 0.71 (item range 0.41-0.92 for the different items) for adherence and 0.76 (item range 0.42-0.91) for quality. With all five raters the mean absolute G-coefficient for adherence was 0.86 (item range 0.63-0.97) and 0.88 for quality (item range 0.64-0.96). The study demonstrates high reliability of ratings of MBT-G-AQS. In models differentiating between different numbers of raters, reliability was particularly high when including several raters, but was also acceptable for two raters. For practical purposes, the MBT-G-AQS can be used for training, supervision and psychotherapy research.

Does a web-based feedback training program result in improved reliability in clinicians' ratings of the Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF) Scale?

The Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF) Scale is used in routine clinical practice and research to estimate symptom and functional severity and longitudinal change. Concerns about poor interrater reliability have been raised, and the present study evaluated the effect of a Web-based GAF training program designed to improve interrater reliability in routine clinical practice. Clinicians rated up to 20 vignettes online, and received deviation scores as immediate feedback (i.e., own scores compared with expert raters) after each rating. Growth curves of absolute SD scores across the vignettes were modeled. A linear mixed effects model, using the clinician's deviation scores from expert raters as the dependent variable, indicated an improvement in reliability during training. Moderation by content of scale (symptoms; functioning), scale range (average; extreme), previous experience with GAF rating, profession, and postgraduate training were assessed. Training reduced deviation scores for inexperienced GAF raters, for individuals in clinical professions other than nursing and medicine, and for individuals with no postgraduate specialization. In addition, training was most beneficial for cases with average severity of symptoms compared with cases with extreme severity. The results support the use of Web-based training with feedback routines as a means to improve the reliability of GAF ratings performed by clinicians in mental health practice. These results especially pertain to clinicians in mental health practice who do not have a masters or doctoral degree.