Binks C A, Fenton M, McCarthy L, Lee T, Adams C E, Duggan C
University of Bristol, 8 Priory, Bristol, UK, BS8 1TZ.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2006 Jan 25(1):CD005652. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD005652.
Borderline personality disorder (BPD) is a relatively common personality disorder with a major impact on health services as those affected often present in crisis, often self-harming.
To evaluate the effects of psychological interventions for people with borderline personality disorder.
We conducted a systematic search of 26 specialist and general bibliographic databases (December 2002) and searched relevant reference lists for further trials.
All relevant clinical randomised controlled trials involving psychological treatments for people with BPD. The definition of psychological treatments included behavioural, cognitive-behavioural, psychodynamic and psychoanalytic.
We independently selected, quality assessed and data extracted studies. For binary outcomes we calculated a standard estimation of the risk ratio (RR), its 95% confidence interval (CI), and where possible the number need to help/harm (NNT/H). For continuous outcomes, endpoint data were preferred to change data. Non-skewed data from valid scales were summated using a weighted mean difference (WMD).
We identified seven studies involving 262 people, and five separate comparisons. Comparing dialectical behaviour therapy (DBT) with treatment as usual studies found no difference for the outcome of still meeting SCID-II criteria for the diagnosis of BPD by six months (n=28, 1 RCT, RR 0.69 CI 0.35 to 1.38) or admission to hospital in previous three months (n=28, 1 RCT, RR 0.77 CI 0.28 to 2.14). Self harm or parasuicide may decrease at 6 to 12 months (n=63, 1 RCT, RR 0.81 CI 0.66 to 0.98, NNT 12 CI 7 to 108). One study detected statistical difference in favour of people receiving DBT compared with those allocated to treatment as usual for average scores of suicidal ideation at 6 months (n=20, MD -15.30 CI -25.46 to -5.14). There was no difference for the outcome of leaving the study early (n=155, 3 RCTs, RR 0.74 CI 0.52 to 1.04). For the outcome of interviewer-assessed alcohol free days, skewed data are reported and tend to favour DBT. When a substance abuse focused DBT was compared with comprehensive validation therapy plus 12-step substance misuse programme no clear differences were found for service outcomes (n=23, 1 RCT, RR imprisoned 1.09 CI 0.64 to 1.87) or leaving the study early (n=23, 1 RCT, RR 7.58 CI 0.44 to 132.08). When dialectical behaviour therapy-oriented treatment is compared with client centred therapy no differences were found for service outcomes (n=24, 1 RCT, RR admitted 0.33 CI 0.08 to 1.33). However, fewer people in the DBT group displayed indicators of parasuicidal behaviour (n=24, RR 0.13 CI 0.02 to 0.85, NNT 2 CI 2 to 11). There were no differences for outcomes of anxiety and depression (n=24, 1 RCT, RR anxiety BAI >/=10 0.60 CI 0.32 to 1.12; RR depression HDRS >/=10 0.43 CI 0.14 to 1.28) but people who received DBT had less general psychiatric severity than those in the control (MD BPRS at 6 months -7.41 CI -13.72 to -1.10). Finally this one relevant study reports skewed data for suicidal ideation with considerably lower scores for people allocated to DBT. When psychoanalytically oriented partial hospitalization was compared with general psychiatric care the former tended to come off best. People who received treatment in a psychoanalytic orientated day hospital were less likely to be admitted into inpatient care when measured at different time points (e.g. n=44, RR admitted to inpatient 24 hour care >18 to 24 months 0.05 CI 0.00 to 0.77, NNT 3 CI 3 to 10) Fewer people in psychoanalytically oriented partial hospitalization needed day hospital intervention in the 18 months after discharge (n=44, 1 RCT, RR 0.04 CI 0.00 to 0.59, NNT 2 CI 2 to 8). More people in the control group took psychotropic medication by the 30 to 36 month follow-up, than those receiving psychoanalytic treatment (n=44, 1 RCT, RR 0.44 CI 0.25 to 0.80, NNT 3 CI 2 to 7). Anxiety and depression scores were generally lower in the psychoanalytically oriented partial hospitalization group (n=44, 1 RCT, RR >/=14 on BDI 0.52 CI 0.34 to 0.80, NNT 3 CI 3 to 6), as are global severity scores. People receiving psychoanalytic care in a day hospital had better social improvement in social adjustment using the SAS-SR at 6 to 12 months compared with people in general psychiatric care (MD -0.70 CI -1.08 to -0.32). Rates of attrition were the same (n=44, 1 RCT, RR leaving the study early 1.00 CI 0.23 to 4.42).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: This review suggests that some of the problems frequently encountered by people with borderline personality disorder may be amenable to talking/behavioural treatments but all therapies remain experimental and the studies are too few and small to inspire full confidence in their results. These findings require replication in larger 'real-world' studies.
边缘型人格障碍(BPD)是一种相对常见的人格障碍,对医疗服务有重大影响,因为患者常处于危机状态,且常有自残行为。
评估针对边缘型人格障碍患者的心理干预效果。
我们于2002年12月对26个专业和综合文献数据库进行了系统检索,并检索了相关参考文献列表以查找更多试验。
所有涉及对BPD患者进行心理治疗的相关临床随机对照试验。心理治疗的定义包括行为疗法、认知行为疗法、心理动力疗法和精神分析疗法。
我们独立选择、评估质量并提取数据。对于二分结局,我们计算了风险比(RR)的标准估计值、其95%置信区间(CI),并在可能的情况下计算了需治疗人数/有害人数(NNT/H)。对于连续结局,终点数据优于变化数据。使用加权均数差(WMD)对有效量表的非偏态数据进行汇总。
我们纳入了7项研究,共262人,以及5项独立比较。将辩证行为疗法(DBT)与常规治疗相比较,在6个月时仍符合SCID-II标准诊断为BPD的结局方面未发现差异(n = 28,1项随机对照试验,RR 0.69,CI 0.35至1.38),或在前三个月住院方面也未发现差异(n = 28,1项随机对照试验,RR 0.77,CI 0.28至2.14)。在6至12个月时,自残或准自杀行为可能会减少(n = 63,1项随机对照试验,RR 0.81,CI 0.66至0.98,NNT 12,CI 7至108)。一项研究发现,与接受常规治疗的人相比,接受DBT的人在6个月时自杀意念平均得分方面存在统计学差异(n = 20,MD -15.30,CI -25.46至-5.14)。在提前退出研究的结局方面没有差异(n = 155,3项随机对照试验,RR 0.74,CI 0.52至1.04)。对于访谈者评估的戒酒天数结局,报告的数据呈偏态,且倾向于支持DBT。当将专注于物质滥用的DBT与综合验证疗法加12步物质滥用项目进行比较时,在服务结局(n = 23,1项随机对照试验,RR入狱1.09,CI 0.64至1.87)或提前退出研究方面未发现明显差异(n = 23,1项随机对照试验,RR 7.58,CI 0.44至132.08)。当将辩证行为疗法导向的治疗与以患者为中心的疗法进行比较时,在服务结局方面未发现差异(n = 24,1项随机对照试验,RR入院0.33,CI 0.08至1.33)。然而,DBT组中表现出自残行为指标的人较少(n = 24,RR 0.13,CI 0.02至0.85,NNT 2,CI 2至11)。在焦虑和抑郁结局方面没有差异(n = 24,1项随机对照试验,RR焦虑BAI≥10 0.60,CI 0.32至1.12;RR抑郁HDRS≥10 0.43,CI 0.14至1.28),但接受DBT的人比对照组的一般精神疾病严重程度更低(6个月时MD BPRS -7.41,CI -13.72至-1.10)。最后,这项相关研究报告了自杀意念数据呈偏态,分配到DBT组的人的得分明显更低。当将精神分析导向的部分住院治疗与普通精神科护理进行比较时,前者往往效果最佳。在不同时间点测量时,接受精神分析导向日间医院治疗的人进入住院护理的可能性较小(例如,n = 44,RR入住24小时住院护理>18至24个月0.05,CI 0.00至0.77,NNT 3,CI 3至10)。在出院后18个月内,接受精神分析导向部分住院治疗的人需要日间医院干预的较少(n = 44,1项随机对照试验,RR 0.04,CI 0.00至0.59,NNT 2,CI 2至8)。到30至36个月随访时,对照组中服用精神药物的人比接受精神分析治疗的人更多(n = 44,1项随机对照试验,RR 0.44,CI 0.25至0.80,NNT 3,CI 2至7)。精神分析导向部分住院治疗组的焦虑和抑郁评分通常较低(n = 44,1项随机对照试验,RR BDI≥14 0.52,CI 0.34至0.80,NNT 3,CI 3至6),总体严重程度评分也是如此。与接受普通精神科护理的人相比,在日间医院接受精神分析护理的人在6至12个月时使用SAS-SR在社会适应方面有更好的社会改善(MD -0.70,CI -1.08至-0.32)。失访率相同(n = 44,1项随机对照试验,RR提前退出研究1.00,CI 0.23至4.42)。
本综述表明,边缘型人格障碍患者经常遇到的一些问题可能适合谈话/行为治疗,但所有疗法仍处于试验阶段,且研究数量过少且规模过小,无法完全信任其结果。这些发现需要在更大规模的“现实世界”研究中进行重复验证。