Een combinatie van individuele- en groepschematherapie is effectiever en heeft een grotere behandelretentie in vergelijking met alleen groepschematherapie of reguliere behandeling. Zelfs na voltooiing van de behandeling zet verbetering door.
Schematherapie (ST), gegeven in een individuele of groepsvorm, is eerder al eens vergeleken met andere actieve behandelingen voor borderline persoonlijkheidsstoornis (BPS). Voor zover bekend zijn de 2 vormen van schematherapie nog niet eerder vergeleken met treatment as usual (TAU) of met elkaar. Dergelijke vergelijkingen helpen echter wel bij het bepalen van de beste behandelmethoden.
In dit gerandomiseerde klinische onderzoek, uitgevoerd op 15 locaties in 5 landen (Australië, Duitsland, Griekenland, Nederland en het VK), werden in een periode van 6 jaar poliklinische patiënten van 18 tot 65 jaar met BPS geselecteerd. Zij kregen ofwel overwegend groepsschematherapie (GST), gecombineerde individuele en groepschematherapie (IGST), of optimale TAU te ontvangen.
Implicaties voor de praktijk
In dit gerandomiseerde klinische onderzoek was IGST effectiever en had het een grotere behandelretentie in vergelijking met TAU en PGST. Deze bevindingen suggereren dat IGST het geprefereerde ST-formaat is, met een hoge retentie en voortzetting van de verbetering van de ernst van de BPS na voltooiing van de behandeling.
{9309347:I8IFNV2H}
vancouver
default
asc
no
1038
%7B%22status%22%3A%22success%22%2C%22updateneeded%22%3Afalse%2C%22instance%22%3A%22zotpress-bf6143ff1032e3abdc71f72cf8976980%22%2C%22meta%22%3A%7B%22request_last%22%3A0%2C%22request_next%22%3A0%2C%22used_cache%22%3Atrue%7D%2C%22data%22%3A%5B%7B%22key%22%3A%22I8IFNV2H%22%2C%22library%22%3A%7B%22id%22%3A9309347%7D%2C%22meta%22%3A%7B%22creatorSummary%22%3A%22Arntz%20et%20al.%22%2C%22parsedDate%22%3A%222022-04-01%22%2C%22numChildren%22%3A2%7D%2C%22bib%22%3A%22%3Cdiv%20class%3D%5C%22csl-bib-body%5C%22%20style%3D%5C%22line-height%3A%201.35%3B%20%5C%22%3E%5Cn%20%20%3Cdiv%20class%3D%5C%22csl-entry%5C%22%20style%3D%5C%22clear%3A%20left%3B%20%5C%22%3E%5Cn%20%20%20%20%3Cdiv%20class%3D%5C%22csl-left-margin%5C%22%20style%3D%5C%22float%3A%20left%3B%20padding-right%3A%200.5em%3B%20text-align%3A%20right%3B%20width%3A%201em%3B%5C%22%3E1.%3C%5C%2Fdiv%3E%3Cdiv%20class%3D%5C%22csl-right-inline%5C%22%20style%3D%5C%22margin%3A%200%20.4em%200%201.5em%3B%5C%22%3EArntz%20A%2C%20Jacob%20GA%2C%20Lee%20CW%2C%20Brand-de%20Wilde%20OM%2C%20Fassbinder%20E%2C%20Harper%20RP%2C%20et%20al.%20Effectiveness%20of%20Predominantly%20Group%20Schema%20Therapy%20and%20Combined%20Individual%20and%20Group%20Schema%20Therapy%20for%20Borderline%20Personality%20Disorder%3A%20A%20Randomized%20Clinical%20Trial.%20JAMA%20Psychiatry%20%5BInternet%5D.%202022%20Apr%201%20%5Bcited%202022%20Apr%2012%5D%3B79%284%29%3A287%26%23x2013%3B99.%20Available%20from%3A%20%3Ca%20href%3D%27https%3A%5C%2F%5C%2Fdoi.org%5C%2F10.1001%5C%2Fjamapsychiatry.2022.0010%27%3Ehttps%3A%5C%2F%5C%2Fdoi.org%5C%2F10.1001%5C%2Fjamapsychiatry.2022.0010%3C%5C%2Fa%3E%3C%5C%2Fdiv%3E%5Cn%20%20%3C%5C%2Fdiv%3E%5Cn%3C%5C%2Fdiv%3E%22%2C%22data%22%3A%7B%22itemType%22%3A%22journalArticle%22%2C%22title%22%3A%22Effectiveness%20of%20Predominantly%20Group%20Schema%20Therapy%20and%20Combined%20Individual%20and%20Group%20Schema%20Therapy%20for%20Borderline%20Personality%20Disorder%3A%20A%20Randomized%20Clinical%20Trial%22%2C%22creators%22%3A%5B%7B%22creatorType%22%3A%22author%22%2C%22firstName%22%3A%22Arnoud%22%2C%22lastName%22%3A%22Arntz%22%7D%2C%7B%22creatorType%22%3A%22author%22%2C%22firstName%22%3A%22Gitta%20A.%22%2C%22lastName%22%3A%22Jacob%22%7D%2C%7B%22creatorType%22%3A%22author%22%2C%22firstName%22%3A%22Christopher%20W.%22%2C%22lastName%22%3A%22Lee%22%7D%2C%7B%22creatorType%22%3A%22author%22%2C%22firstName%22%3A%22Odette%20Manon%22%2C%22lastName%22%3A%22Brand-de%20Wilde%22%7D%2C%7B%22creatorType%22%3A%22author%22%2C%22firstName%22%3A%22Eva%22%2C%22lastName%22%3A%22Fassbinder%22%7D%2C%7B%22creatorType%22%3A%22author%22%2C%22firstName%22%3A%22R.%20Patrick%22%2C%22lastName%22%3A%22Harper%22%7D%2C%7B%22creatorType%22%3A%22author%22%2C%22firstName%22%3A%22Anna%22%2C%22lastName%22%3A%22Lavender%22%7D%2C%7B%22creatorType%22%3A%22author%22%2C%22firstName%22%3A%22George%22%2C%22lastName%22%3A%22Lockwood%22%7D%2C%7B%22creatorType%22%3A%22author%22%2C%22firstName%22%3A%22Ioannis%20A.%22%2C%22lastName%22%3A%22Malogiannis%22%7D%2C%7B%22creatorType%22%3A%22author%22%2C%22firstName%22%3A%22Florian%20A.%22%2C%22lastName%22%3A%22Ruths%22%7D%2C%7B%22creatorType%22%3A%22author%22%2C%22firstName%22%3A%22Ulrich%22%2C%22lastName%22%3A%22Schweiger%22%7D%2C%7B%22creatorType%22%3A%22author%22%2C%22firstName%22%3A%22Ida%20A.%22%2C%22lastName%22%3A%22Shaw%22%7D%2C%7B%22creatorType%22%3A%22author%22%2C%22firstName%22%3A%22Gerhard%22%2C%22lastName%22%3A%22Zarbock%22%7D%2C%7B%22creatorType%22%3A%22author%22%2C%22firstName%22%3A%22Joan%20M.%22%2C%22lastName%22%3A%22Farrell%22%7D%5D%2C%22abstractNote%22%3A%22Schema%20therapy%20%28ST%29%2C%20delivered%20either%20in%20an%20individual%20or%20group%20format%2C%20has%20been%20compared%20with%20other%20active%20treatments%20for%20borderline%20personality%20disorder%20%28BPD%29.%20To%20our%20knowledge%2C%20the%202%20formats%20have%20not%20been%20compared%20with%20treatment%20as%20usual%20%28TAU%29%20or%20with%20each%20other.%20Such%20comparisons%20help%20determine%20best%20treatment%20practices.To%20evaluate%20whether%20ST%20is%20more%20effectively%20delivered%20in%20a%20predominantly%20group%20or%20combined%20individual%20and%20group%20format%20and%20whether%20ST%20is%20more%20effective%20than%20optimal%20TAU%20for%20BPD.In%20this%20multicenter%2C%203-arm%20randomized%20clinical%20trial%20conducted%20at%2015%20sites%20in%205%20countries%20%28Australia%2C%20Germany%2C%20Greece%2C%20the%20Netherlands%2C%20and%20the%20UK%29%2C%20outpatients%20aged%2018%20to%2065%20years%20who%20had%20BPD%20were%20recruited%20between%20June%2029%2C%202010%2C%20and%20May%2018%2C%202016%2C%20to%20receive%20either%20predominantly%20group%20ST%20%28PGST%29%2C%20combined%20individual%20and%20group%20ST%20%28IGST%29%2C%20or%20optimal%20TAU.%20Data%20were%20analyzed%20from%20June%204%2C%202019%2C%20to%20December%2029%2C%202021.At%20each%20site%2C%20cohorts%20of%2016%20to%2018%20participants%20were%20randomized%201%3A1%20to%20PGST%20vs%20TAU%20or%20IGST%20vs%20TAU.%20Both%20ST%20formats%20were%20delivered%20over%202%20years%2C%20with%202%20sessions%20per%20week%20in%20year%201%20and%20the%20frequency%20gradually%20decreasing%20during%20year%202.%20Assessments%20were%20collected%20by%20blinded%20assessors.The%20primary%20outcome%20was%20the%20change%20in%20BPD%20severity%20over%20time%2C%20assessed%20with%20the%20Borderline%20Personality%20Disorder%20Severity%20Index%20%28BPDSI%29%20total%20score.%20Treatment%20retention%20was%20analyzed%20as%20a%20secondary%20outcome%20using%20generalized%20linear%20mixed%20model%20survival%20analysis.Of%20495%20participants%20%28mean%20%5BSD%5D%20age%2C%2033.6%20%5B9.4%5D%20years%3B%20426%20%5B86.2%25%5D%20female%29%2C%20246%20%2849.7%25%29%20received%20TAU%2C%20125%20%2825.2%25%29%20received%20PGST%2C%20and%20124%20%2825.0%25%29%20received%20IGST%20%281%20of%20whom%20later%20withdrew%20consent%29.%20PGST%20and%20IGST%20combined%20were%20superior%20to%20TAU%20with%20regard%20to%20reduced%20BPD%20severity%20%28Cohen%20d%2C%200.73%3B%2095%25%20CI%2C%200.29-1.18%3B%20P%5Cu2009%26lt%3B%5Cu2009.001%29.%20For%20this%20outcome%2C%20IGST%20was%20superior%20to%20TAU%20%28Cohen%20d%2C%201.14%3B%2095%25%20CI%2C%200.57-1.71%3B%20P%5Cu2009%26lt%3B%5Cu2009.001%29%20and%20PGST%20%28Cohen%20d%2C%200.84%3B%2095%25%20CI%2C%200.09-1.59%3B%20P%5Cu2009%3D%5Cu2009.03%29%2C%20whereas%20PGST%20did%20not%20differ%20significantly%20from%20TAU%20%28Cohen%20d%2C%200.30%3B%2095%25%20CI%2C%20%5Cu22120.29%20to%200.89%3B%20P%5Cu2009%3D%5Cu2009.32%29.%20Treatment%20retention%20was%20greater%20in%20the%20IGST%20arm%20than%20in%20the%20PGST%20%281%20year%3A%200.82%20vs%200.72%3B%202%20years%3A%200.74%20vs.%200.62%29%20and%20TAU%20%281%20year%3A%200.82%20vs%200.73%3B%202%20years%3A%200.74%20vs%200.64%29%20arms%2C%20and%20there%20was%20no%20significant%20difference%20between%20the%20TAU%20and%20PGST%20arms%20%281%20year%3A%200.73%20vs%200.72%3B%202%20years%3A%200.64%20vs%200.62%29.In%20this%20randomized%20clinical%20trial%2C%20IGST%20was%20more%20effective%20and%20had%20greater%20treatment%20retention%20compared%20with%20TAU%20and%20PGST.%20These%20findings%20suggest%20that%20IGST%20is%20the%20preferred%20ST%20format%2C%20with%20high%20retention%20and%20continuation%20of%20improvement%20in%20BPD%20severity%20after%20the%20completion%20of%20treatment.trialregister.nl%20Identifier%3A%20NTR2392%22%2C%22date%22%3A%222022-04-01%22%2C%22language%22%3A%22%22%2C%22DOI%22%3A%2210.1001%5C%2Fjamapsychiatry.2022.0010%22%2C%22ISSN%22%3A%222168-622X%22%2C%22url%22%3A%22https%3A%5C%2F%5C%2Fdoi.org%5C%2F10.1001%5C%2Fjamapsychiatry.2022.0010%22%2C%22collections%22%3A%5B%5D%2C%22dateModified%22%3A%222022-04-12T17%3A02%3A09Z%22%7D%7D%5D%7D
1.
Arntz A, Jacob GA, Lee CW, Brand-de Wilde OM, Fassbinder E, Harper RP, et al. Effectiveness of Predominantly Group Schema Therapy and Combined Individual and Group Schema Therapy for Borderline Personality Disorder: A Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA Psychiatry [Internet]. 2022 Apr 1 [cited 2022 Apr 12];79(4):287–99. Available from:
https://doi.org/10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2022.0010