Too late for early intervention? The Healthy Ageing Service's mental health response.

OBJECTIVES: This paper describes the rationale for and development of an innovative mental health service for people aged over 65 years living in Northern and Eastern Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. CONCLUSION: The Healthy Ageing Service (HAS) was established in July 2020 to provide care for people aged over 65 years experiencing mild-to-moderate mental health concerns. It embraces a prevention and early intervention model of care. It provides primary consultation and brief intervention, secondary consultation, and capacity building to the primary healthcare sector. This innovative service is a Commonwealth-funded partnership between two tertiary mental health service providers that incorporates the recommendations from two major Royal Commissions. It demonstrates a service that acts as a bridge between primary and specialist mental health care, thereby extending mental health services to target the 'missing middle' and is potentially a model for mental health service provision throughout Victoria and Australia.

Development and Preliminary Evaluation of a Rapid Screening Tool for Detecting Borderline Personality Disorder in People Aged over 60 Years.

OBJECTIVES: Screening and diagnostic instruments for Borderline Personality Disorder (BPD) are not validated in people aged over 60. We report a pilot study examining the sensitivity and specificity of a de-novo screening instrument in older adults. METHODS: The BPD-OA screening tool incorporates DSM 5 and literature describing the expression of BPD in older adults. This study was conducted using a case control design. The Diagnostic Interview for Borderlines-Revised (DIB-R) and the McLean Screening Instrument for BPD (MSI-BPD) were used as comparators. Comprehensive assessment by psychiatric teams determined participants to be (i) BPD-positive (n = 22) or (ii) BPD-negative (gender matched; n = 21). RESULTS: The BPD-OA was the most sensitive instrument for discriminating older adult BPD from non-BPD participants (sensitivity = 0.82). No significant relationship was found between the BPD-OA score and age in BPD-diagnosed participants (r = -0.181, n = 21, p = .432). Participant age explained 3.2% of the variance in BPD-OA scores. Of the 21 BPD-negative participants, eight false positives experienced prominent mood disorders (specificity = 0.62). CONCLUSIONS: The BPD-OA screening tool is clearly superior to instruments validated for use in younger people. Further refinement and evaluation will enhance its sensitivity and specificity. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Detection of BPD in older adult care settings will improve outcomes for patients, families, and staff through better understanding and appropriate management and treatment strategies.