Patient perspectives on non-response to psychotherapy for borderline personality disorder: a qualitative study.

IF 4 2区 医学 Q1 PSYCHIATRY
Jane Woodbridge, Michelle L Townsend, Samantha L Reis, Brin F S Grenyer
{"title":"Patient perspectives on non-response to psychotherapy for borderline personality disorder: a qualitative study.","authors":"Jane Woodbridge,&nbsp;Michelle L Townsend,&nbsp;Samantha L Reis,&nbsp;Brin F S Grenyer","doi":"10.1186/s40479-023-00219-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Despite increasing evidence for the effectiveness of psychotherapy for Borderline Personality Disorder (BPD), estimates show that approximately half of those in treatment do not clinically improve or reach reliable change criteria. There are limited qualitative descriptions of treatment factors associated with non-response from the perspectives of those struggling to improve.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Eighteen people (72.2% female, mean age 29.4 (SD = 8)) with experience of receiving psychotherapeutic treatment for BPD were interviewed to obtain their perspectives on hindering factors in treatment and what may be helpful to reduce non-response. The data in this qualitative study was analysed thematically.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Four domains were created from the insights patients shared on non-response and what may be needed to mitigate it. The focus of Domain 1 was that therapy cannot be effective until two factors are in place. First, the patient needs sufficient safety and stability in their environment in order to face the challenges of therapy. Second, they need to be able to access therapy. Domain 2 described factors the patients themselves contribute. The themes in this domain were described as phases that need to be progressed through before therapy can be effective. These phases were ceasing denial that help is warranted and deserved, taking responsibility for behaviours that contribute to unwellness, and committing to the hard work that is required for change. Domain 3 described how the lack of a safe alliance and ruptures in the safety of the relationship with the therapist can contribute to non-response. Domain 4 was comprised of factors that patients identified as supportive of moving through the barriers to response. The first theme in this domain was prioritising the safety of the therapy relationship. The second theme was giving a clear diagnosis and taking a collaborative approach in sessions. The final theme described the importance of focusing on practical goals with the patient to create tangible life changes.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This study found that non-response is complex and multifaceted. First, it is clear that systems need to be in place to support access to adequate care and foster life stability. Second, considerable effort may be needed at the engagement phase of therapy to clarify expectations. Third, attention to specific interpersonal challenges between patients and therapists is an important focus. Finally, structured work to improve relationships and vocational outcomes is indicated.</p>","PeriodicalId":48586,"journal":{"name":"Borderline Personality Disorder and Emotion Dysregulation","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10114439/pdf/","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Borderline Personality Disorder and Emotion Dysregulation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s40479-023-00219-y","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Background: Despite increasing evidence for the effectiveness of psychotherapy for Borderline Personality Disorder (BPD), estimates show that approximately half of those in treatment do not clinically improve or reach reliable change criteria. There are limited qualitative descriptions of treatment factors associated with non-response from the perspectives of those struggling to improve.

Method: Eighteen people (72.2% female, mean age 29.4 (SD = 8)) with experience of receiving psychotherapeutic treatment for BPD were interviewed to obtain their perspectives on hindering factors in treatment and what may be helpful to reduce non-response. The data in this qualitative study was analysed thematically.

Results: Four domains were created from the insights patients shared on non-response and what may be needed to mitigate it. The focus of Domain 1 was that therapy cannot be effective until two factors are in place. First, the patient needs sufficient safety and stability in their environment in order to face the challenges of therapy. Second, they need to be able to access therapy. Domain 2 described factors the patients themselves contribute. The themes in this domain were described as phases that need to be progressed through before therapy can be effective. These phases were ceasing denial that help is warranted and deserved, taking responsibility for behaviours that contribute to unwellness, and committing to the hard work that is required for change. Domain 3 described how the lack of a safe alliance and ruptures in the safety of the relationship with the therapist can contribute to non-response. Domain 4 was comprised of factors that patients identified as supportive of moving through the barriers to response. The first theme in this domain was prioritising the safety of the therapy relationship. The second theme was giving a clear diagnosis and taking a collaborative approach in sessions. The final theme described the importance of focusing on practical goals with the patient to create tangible life changes.

Conclusion: This study found that non-response is complex and multifaceted. First, it is clear that systems need to be in place to support access to adequate care and foster life stability. Second, considerable effort may be needed at the engagement phase of therapy to clarify expectations. Third, attention to specific interpersonal challenges between patients and therapists is an important focus. Finally, structured work to improve relationships and vocational outcomes is indicated.

Abstract Image

边缘型人格障碍患者对心理治疗无反应的看法:一项定性研究。
背景:尽管越来越多的证据表明心理治疗对边缘型人格障碍(BPD)有效,但估计显示,大约一半的治疗患者没有临床改善或达到可靠的改变标准。从那些努力改善的人的角度来看,对与无反应相关的治疗因素的定性描述有限。方法:对接受过BPD心理治疗的18例患者(72.2%为女性,平均年龄29.4岁(SD = 8))进行访谈,了解他们对治疗中阻碍因素的看法,以及可能有助于减少无反应的因素。本定性研究的数据进行了专题分析。结果:从患者分享的见解中创建了四个领域,以减轻无反应和可能需要什么。领域1的重点是,在两个因素到位之前,治疗无法有效。首先,患者需要足够的安全和稳定的环境来面对治疗的挑战。其次,他们需要能够获得治疗。域2描述了患者自身的影响因素。这个领域的主题被描述为在治疗有效之前需要进展的阶段。这些阶段是停止否认帮助是必要的和值得的,对导致不健康的行为负责,并致力于改变所需要的艰苦工作。领域3描述了缺乏安全的联盟以及与治疗师的安全关系的破裂如何导致无反应。区域4是由患者认为支持通过障碍做出反应的因素组成的。这一领域的第一个主题是优先考虑治疗关系的安全性。第二个主题是在会议中给出明确的诊断和采取协作的方法。最后一个主题描述了与患者一起关注实际目标以创造切实的生活变化的重要性。结论:本研究发现无反应是复杂的、多方面的。首先,很明显,需要建立支持获得适当护理和促进生活稳定的制度。其次,在治疗的参与阶段可能需要相当大的努力来澄清期望。第三,关注患者与治疗师之间特定的人际挑战是一个重要的焦点。最后,指出了改善人际关系和职业成果的结构化工作。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.00
自引率
9.80%
发文量
30
审稿时长
28 weeks
期刊介绍: Borderline Personality Disorder and Emotion Dysregulation provides a platform for researchers and clinicians interested in borderline personality disorder (BPD) as a currently highly challenging psychiatric disorder. Emotion dysregulation is at the core of BPD but also stands on its own as a major pathological component of the underlying neurobiology of various other psychiatric disorders. The journal focuses on the psychological, social and neurobiological aspects of emotion dysregulation as well as epidemiology, phenomenology, pathophysiology, treatment, neurobiology, genetics, and animal models of BPD.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信