Background. Behavioral dyscontrol and violations of treatment contracts are serious clinical problems during psychotherapy, especially in treating patients with personality disorders. However, little is known about predictors of these treatment-interfering phenomena.Objective. To identify psychodynamic personality characteristics that can interfere with the psychotherapy process as indicated by treatment-disrupting behaviors.Methods. Sociodemographic characteristics, descriptive psychiatric diagnoses, and psychodynamic characteristics were assessed in 89 inpatients with personality disorders in psychotherapeutic treatment. Psychodynamic charac teristics were assessed with the Developmental Profile (DP). DP variables were used to predict impulsive acts, anger outbursts, parasuicidal behaviors, and contract violations. Incremental value was established.Results. In this sample, 4 out of 5 patients engaged in treatment-interfering behaviors during the first 3 months of therapy. In general, treatment-disrupting behaviors were not predicted by baseline DSM-IV Axis I or II disorders. In contrast, impulsive behaviors, anger outbursts, and contract violations were significantly predicted by psychodynamic variables, especially the DP levels Fragmentation and Egocentricity. DP variables accounted for an incremental predictive value of 23% for treatment-disrupting behaviors, over and above demographics and descriptive diagnoses. Parasuicidal gestures were not predicted by either DSM-IV diagnoses or psychodynamic variables. KEY WORDS: personality disorder, psychodynamic diagnosis, Developmental Profile, treatment-disrupting behaviors, predictive validity, incremental value

This study aimed to evaluate the differential effect of outcome monitoring feedback to therapists and to patients on outcomes in cluster B, cluster C, and personality disorder not otherwise specified (PD-NOS) patients. Day treatment patients (n = 112) and inpatients (n = 94) were randomly assigned to a feedback to therapist (FbT), feedback to therapist and patient (FbTP), or no feedback (NFb) condition. Feedback was based on weekly administrations of the Outcome Questionnaire-45 (OQ-45). In cluster B and PD-NOS patients FbTP resulted in increased OQ-45 scores during the first 6 months of therapy for not on track (NOT) patients. In cluster C patients, no adverse effects of feedback were found. These results suggest that for certain personality disorder patient groups, providing feedback during treatment may not always be beneficial, although more research is needed to further assess these effects.

Background An adequate frequency of treatment might be a prerequisite for a favorable outcome. Unfortunately, there is a diversity of factors that interfere with an adequate frequency of sessions. This occurs especially in the first phase of treatment, while the first phase seems vital for the rest of treatment. The aim of this naturalistic study was to explore the impact of the initial frequency of treatment sessions on treatment outcome in a diverse mental health care population. Methods Anonymized data were analyzed from 2,634 patients allocated for anxiety disorders, depressive disorders, and personality disorders to outpatient treatment programs in a large general mental health care facility. Patients’ treatment outcome was routinely monitored with the Outcome Questionnaire-45 (OQ-45.2), every 12 weeks. Frequency of sessions was assessed for the first three months of treatment. Using Cox-proportional-hazard models, we explored the associations between initial frequency and improvement (reliable significant change) and recovery (reliable and clinically significant change). Results Improvement and recovery were associated with symptom severity and functional impairment at start of treatment, the year the treatment started, number of measurements, the treatment program (anxiety disorders, depressive disorders, and personality disorders) and receiving group therapy other than psychotherapy. In all diagnostic groups, both improvement and recovery were associated with a higher frequency of sessions during the first three months of treatment. For improvement, this effect diminished after three years in treatment; however, for recovery this association was sustained. Conclusions In addition to severity at start of treatment and other predictors of outcome, a low frequency of initial treatment sessions might lead to a less favorable outcome and a more chronic course of the mental disorder. This association seems not to be limited to a specific diagnostic group, but was found in a large group of patients with common mental disorders (depression and anxiety disorders) and patients with a personality disorder. Despite organizational obstacles, more effort should be made to start treatment quickly by an effective frequency of session.

No abstract