Effectiveness of Predominantly Group Schema Therapy and Combined Individual and Group Schema Therapy for Borderline Personality Disorder:A Randomized Clinical Trial

IMPORTANCE: Schema therapy (ST), delivered either in an individual or group format, has been compared with other active treatments for borderline personality disorder (BPD). To our knowledge, the 2 formats have not been compared with treatment as usual (TAU) or with each other. Such comparisons help determine best treatment practices. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether ST is more effectively delivered in a predominantly group or combined individual and group format and whether ST is more effective than optimal TAU for BPD. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: In this multicenter, 3-arm randomized clinical trial conducted at 15 sites in 5 countries (Australia, Germany, Greece, the Netherlands, and the UK), outpatients aged 18 to 65 years who had BPD were recruited between June 29, 2010, and May 18, 2016, to receive either predominantly group ST (PGST), combined individual and group ST (IGST), or optimal TAU. Data were analyzed from June 4, 2019, to December 29, 2021. INTERVENTIONS: At each site, cohorts of 16 to 18 participants were randomized 1:1 to PGST vs TAU or IGST vs TAU. Both ST formats were delivered over 2 years, with 2 sessions per week in year 1 and the frequency gradually decreasing during year 2. Assessments were collected by blinded assessors. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcome was the change in BPD severity over time, assessed with the Borderline Personality Disorder Severity Index (BPDSI) total score. Treatment retention was analyzed as a secondary outcome using generalized linear mixed model survival analysis. RESULTS: Of 495 participants (mean [SD] age, 33.6 [9.4] years; 426 [86.2%] female), 246 (49.7%) received TAU, 125 (25.2%) received PGST, and 124 (25.0%) received IGST (1 of whom later withdrew consent). PGST and IGST combined were superior to TAU with regard to reduced BPD severity (Cohen d, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.29-1.18; P < .001). For this outcome, IGST was superior to TAU (Cohen d, 1.14; 95% CI, 0.57-1.71; P < .001) and PGST (Cohen d, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.09-1.59; P = .03), whereas PGST did not differ significantly from TAU (Cohen d, 0.30; 95% CI, −0.29 to 0.89; P = .32). Treatment retention was greater in the IGST arm than in the PGST (1 year: 0.82 vs 0.72; 2 years: 0.74 vs. 0.62) and TAU (1 year: 0.82 vs 0.73; 2 years: 0.74 vs 0.64) arms, and there was no significant difference between the TAU and PGST arms (1 year: 0.73 vs 0.72; 2 years: 0.64 vs 0.62). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In this randomized clinical trial, IGST was more effective and had greater treatment retention compared with TAU and PGST. These findings suggest that IGST is the preferred ST format, with high retention and continuation of improvement in BPD severity after the completion of treatment. TRIAL REGISTRATION: trialregister.nl Identifier: NTR239

Correction to: Design of an international multicentre RCT on group schema therapy for borderline personality disorder

Correction to: BMC Psychiatry 14, 319 (2014)..

Attentional facilitation of response is impaired for antisaccades but not for saccades in patients with schizophrenia: Implications for cortical dysfunction

The facilitation of response known as the &quot;gap effect&quot; (a decrease of response latency), observed for saccades and antisaccades when attention is modulated prior to such eye movements, was studied in patients with schizophrenia and in controls. The hypothesis tested was whether patients would show a deficient attentional facilitation in response latency. Fifteen patients with schizophrenia and 17 healthy controls performed blocks of saccades and antisaccades in a &quot;gap&quot; condition and an &quot;overlap&quot; condition. Saccade and antisaccade response latencies as well as the error rate for antisaccades were measured for each subject. A similar gap effect (decrease in latency for the gap compared to the overlap condition) was present in the saccade task for patients and controls. In contrast the gap effect in the antisaccade task was absent in 50% of patients compared to none of the controls. This finding was interpreted as indicative of deficient pre-processing in antisaccade-specific cortical areas in schizophrenia (such as the prefrontal cortex), while visually guided saccade processing remained intact. Our results, in addition to many other recent findings, could lead to specific hypotheses on cortical dysfunction in schizophrenia. © Springer-Verlag 2004

Validation of the greek version of the Young Schema Questionnaire-Short Form 3: Internal consistency reliability and validity

Schema therapy (ST) is an integrative therapy, which combines elements of cognitive behavior therapy, attachment theory, object relations theory and emotional-focused models. Schema therapy is an effective treatment for patients with personality disorders and other chronic psychological disorders. Early Maladaptive Schemas (EMSs) are a main concept in schema theory referring to self-defeating, core themes or patterns. They develop as a result of traumatic or toxic childhood experiences and the frustration of the core emotional needs in childhood. To date 18 EMSs have been identified and grouped into five higher order structures, known as domains. For the evaluation of the EMSs, Young developed a self-report inventory, the Young Schema Questionnaire (YSQ). There are two forms of the YSQ, the Young Schema Questionnaire - Long Form 3 (YSQ-L3) a 232-item inventory and the Young Schema Questionnaire - Short form 3 (YSQ-S3), a 90-item inventory, which is a subset of the Long form. The aim of this study was to validate the Greek Version of the YSQ-S3. A non-clinical sample of 1,236 undergraduate students completed the YSQ-S3 and 124 patients with Axis-I, Axis II or comorbid diagnosis, completed the YSQ-L3. Moreover, both samples completed the second part of the Adults Self Report (ASR). Internal consistency reliability, discriminative, convergent and predictive validity were examined. The internal consistency reliability of the schema factors was satisfactory with a Cronbach&apos;s alpha coefficient of 0.70 or above, for all factors in both student&apos;s and clinical sample. The effect sizes were high for most of the scales, regarding the differences between clinical and non-clinical sample. Emotional Deprivation, Vulnerability to harm or Illness, Subjugation, Social Isolation/Alienation and Defectiveness/Shame had the highest effect sizes in the clinical sample and in the non-clinical sample according to whether they had ever visited a mental health specialist. This may suggest that these EMSs are more sensitive and useful markers of psychological problems. In addition, patients with Axis II pathology scored significantly higher on Emotional Deprivation, Abandonment, Mistrust/Abuse, Social Isolation/Alienation compared to patients with only Axis I pathology. This finding is consistent with Schema theory, as these EMSs are associated with earlier in life traumatic experiences and insecure attachment and lie in the core of personality pathology. YSQ-S3 factors were significantly correlated with all ASR dimension and linear regression analysis showed that certain EMSs could predict Depressive and Anxiety problems. In total, the greek version of the YSQ-S3 showed good reliability and validity

Effectiveness of Predominantly Group Schema Therapy and Combined Individual and Group Schema Therapy for Borderline Personality Disorder: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance: Schema therapy (ST), delivered either in an individual or group format, has been compared with other active treatments for borderline personality disorder (BPD). To our knowledge, the 2 formats have not been compared with treatment as usual (TAU) or with each other. Such comparisons help determine best treatment practices. Objective: To evaluate whether ST is more effectively delivered in a predominantly group or combined individual and group format and whether ST is more effective than optimal TAU for BPD. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this multicenter, 3-arm randomized clinical trial conducted at 15 sites in 5 countries (Australia, Germany, Greece, the Netherlands, and the UK), outpatients aged 18 to 65 years who had BPD were recruited between June 29, 2010, and May 18, 2016, to receive either predominantly group ST (PGST), combined individual and group ST (IGST), or optimal TAU. Data were analyzed from June 4, 2019, to December 29, 2021. Interventions: At each site, cohorts of 16 to 18 participants were randomized 1:1 to PGST vs TAU or IGST vs TAU. Both ST formats were delivered over 2 years, with 2 sessions per week in year 1 and the frequency gradually decreasing during year 2. Assessments were collected by blinded assessors. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the change in BPD severity over time, assessed with the Borderline Personality Disorder Severity Index (BPDSI) total score. Treatment retention was analyzed as a secondary outcome using generalized linear mixed model survival analysis. Results: Of 495 participants (mean [SD] age, 33.6 [9.4] years; 426 [86.2%] female), 246 (49.7%) received TAU, 125 (25.2%) received PGST, and 124 (25.0%) received IGST (1 of whom later withdrew consent). PGST and IGST combined were superior to TAU with regard to reduced BPD severity (Cohen d, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.29-1.18; P &lt;.001). For this outcome, IGST was superior to TAU (Cohen d, 1.14; 95% CI, 0.57-1.71; P &lt;.001) and PGST (Cohen d, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.09-1.59; P =.03), whereas PGST did not differ significantly from TAU (Cohen d, 0.30; 95% CI, -0.29 to 0.89; P =.32). Treatment retention was greater in the IGST arm than in the PGST (1 year: 0.82 vs 0.72; 2 years: 0.74 vs. 0.62) and TAU (1 year: 0.82 vs 0.73; 2 years: 0.74 vs 0.64) arms, and there was no significant difference between the TAU and PGST arms (1 year: 0.73 vs 0.72; 2 years: 0.64 vs 0.62). Conclusions and Relevance: In this randomized clinical trial, IGST was more effective and had greater treatment retention compared with TAU and PGST. These findings suggest that IGST is the preferred ST format, with high retention and continuation of improvement in BPD severity after the completion of treatment. Trial Registration: trialregister.nl Identifier: NTR2392. © 2022 Arntz A et al

Correction to: Design of an international multicentre RCT on group schema therapy for borderline personality disorder (BMC Psychiatry, (2014), 14, 1, (319), 10.1186/s12888-014-0319-3)

Following publication of the original article [1], the authors identified errors in the numbers of the below sentences. The updated numbers are given below and the changes have been highlighted in bold typeface. The sentences currently read: In format A (GST-A), two-year GST consists of 124 groups sessions with a duration of 90 minutes. In addition, in GST-A a total of up to 18 individual sessions can be used at the patients discretion or in times of crisis. In total, patients in this condition receive 74 group sessions and 62 individual sessions. The sentences should read: In format A (GST-A), two-year GST consists of 118 groups sessions with a duration of 90 minutes. In addition, in GST-A a total of up to 17 individual sessions can be used at the patients discretion or in times of crisis. In total, patients in this condition receive 63 group sessions and 61 individual sessions. The original article [1] has been corrected. © The Author(s) 2022

Design of an international multicentre RCT on group schema therapy for borderline personality disorder

Background: Borderline personality disorder (BPD) is a severe and highly prevalent mental disorder. Schema therapy (ST) has been found effective in the treatment of BPD and is commonly delivered through an individual format. A group format (group schema therapy, GST) has also been developed. GST has been found to speed up and amplify the treatment effects found for individual ST. Delivery in a group format may lead to improved cost-effectiveness. An important question is how GST compares to treatment as usual (TAU) and what format for delivery of schema therapy (format A; intensive group therapy only, or format B; a combination of group and individual therapy) produces the best outcomes. Methods/Design: An international, multicentre randomized controlled trial (RCT) will be conducted with a minimum of fourteen participating centres. Each centre will recruit multiple cohorts of at least sixteen patients. GST formats as well as the orders in which they are delivered to successive cohorts will be balanced. Within countries that contribute an uneven number of sites, the orders of GST formats will be balanced within a difference of one. The RCT is designed to include a minimum of 448 patients with BPD. The primary clinical outcome measure will be BPD severity. Secondary clinical outcome measures will include measures of BPD and general psychiatric symptoms, schemas and schema modes, social functioning and quality of life. Furthermore, an economic evaluation that consists of cost-effectiveness and cost-utility analyses will be performed using a societal perspective. Lastly, additional investigations will be carried out that include an assessment of the integrity of GST, a qualitative study on patients’ and therapists’ experiences with GST, and studies on variables that might influence the effectiveness of GST. Discussion: This trial will compare GST to TAU for patients with BPD as well as two different formats for the delivery of GST. By combining an evaluation of clinical effectiveness, an economic evaluation and additional investigations, it will contribute to an evidence-based understanding of which treatment should be offered to patients with BPD from clinical, economic, and stakeholders’ perspectives

Design of an international multicentre RCT on group schema therapy for borderline personality disorder

Background: Borderline personality disorder (BPD) is a severe and highly prevalent mental disorder. Schema therapy (ST) has been found effective in the treatment of BPD and is commonly delivered through an individual format. A group format (group schema therapy, GST) has also been developed. GST has been found to speed up and amplify the treatment effects found for individual ST. Delivery in a group format may lead to improved cost-effectiveness. An important question is how GST compares to treatment as usual (TAU) and what format for delivery of schema therapy (format A; intensive group therapy only, or format B; a combination of group and individual therapy) produces the best outcomes. Methods/Design: An international, multicentre randomized controlled trial (RCT) will be conducted with a minimum of fourteen participating centres. Each centre will recruit multiple cohorts of at least sixteen patients. GST formats as well as the orders in which they are delivered to successive cohorts will be balanced. Within countries that contribute an uneven number of sites, the orders of GST formats will be balanced within a difference of one. The RCT is designed to include a minimum of 448 patients with BPD. The primary clinical outcome measure will be BPD severity. Secondary clinical outcome measures will include measures of BPD and general psychiatric symptoms, schemas and schema modes, social functioning and quality of life. Furthermore, an economic evaluation that consists of cost-effectiveness and cost-utility analyses will be performed using a societal perspective. Lastly, additional investigations will be carried out that include an assessment of the integrity of GST, a qualitative study on patients&apos; and therapists&apos; experiences with GST, and studies on variables that might influence the effectiveness of GST. Discussion: This trial will compare GST to TAU for patients with BPD as well as two different formats for the delivery of GST. By combining an evaluation of clinical effectiveness, an economic evaluation and additional investigations, it will contribute to an evidence-based understanding of which treatment should be offered to patients with BPD from clinical, economic, and stakeholders&apos; perspectives. © Wetzelaer et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd