6
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      A randomized controlled trial comparing the clinical efficacy and cost-effectiveness of eye movement desensitization and reprocessing (EMDR) and integrated EMDR-Dialectical Behavioural Therapy (DBT) in the treatment of patients with post-traumatic stress disorder and comorbid (Sub)clinical borderline personality disorder: study design

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Comorbidity between Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) and Borderline Personality Disorder (BPD) is high. There is growing motivation among clinicians to offer PTSD treatments – such as Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing (EMDR) - to patients with PTSD and comorbid BPD. However, a large subgroup with comorbid BPD does not sufficiently respond to PTSD treatment and is more likely to be excluded or to dropout from treatment. Dialectical Behaviour Therapy (DBT) for BPD is well established and although there is some evidence that DBT combined with DBT Prolonged Exposure (DBT + DBT PE) is twice as effective in reducing PTSD symptoms than DBT alone, the comparative efficacy of integrated PTSD-DBT and PTSD-only treatment has not been investigated yet. The current study will therefore evaluate the comparative clinical efficacy and cost-effectiveness of EMDR-DBT and EMDR-only in patients with PTSD and comorbid (sub)clinical BPD. Moreover, it is not clear yet what treatment works best for which individual patient. The current study will therefore evaluate neurobiological predictors and mediators of the individual response to treatment.

          Method

          A randomized controlled trial comparing the clinical efficacy and cost-effectiveness of integrated EMDR-DBT ( n = 63) and EMDR-only (n = 63) in treatment-seeking adult patients with PTSD and comorbid (sub)clinical BPD. In addition, neurobiological predictors and mediators of treatment outcome, such as hair cortisol, FKBP5 and BDNF protein levels and FKBP5 and BDNF methylation status, are measured through hair and blood samples.

          Discussion

          This is the first study to compare the clinical efficacy and cost-effectiveness of integrated EMDR-DBT and EMDR-only in patients with PTSD and comorbid (sub)clinical BPD, while simultaneously identifying individual predictors and mediators of treatment response. Results will reveal which treatment works best for which individual patient, thereby guiding individual treatment choices and personalizing psychiatry.

          Trial registration

          Clinical Trials, NCT03833453. Retrospectively registered, 15 March 2019.

          Related collections

          Most cited references55

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          National estimates of exposure to traumatic events and PTSD prevalence using DSM-IV and DSM-5 criteria.

          Prevalence of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) defined according to the American Psychiatric Association's Diagnostic and Statistical Manual fifth edition (DSM-5; 2013) and fourth edition (DSM-IV; 1994) was compared in a national sample of U.S. adults (N = 2,953) recruited from an online panel. Exposure to traumatic events, PTSD symptoms, and functional impairment were assessed online using a highly structured, self-administered survey. Traumatic event exposure using DSM-5 criteria was high (89.7%), and exposure to multiple traumatic event types was the norm. PTSD caseness was determined using Same Event (i.e., all symptom criteria met to the same event type) and Composite Event (i.e., symptom criteria met to a combination of event types) definitions. Lifetime, past-12-month, and past 6-month PTSD prevalence using the Same Event definition for DSM-5 was 8.3%, 4.7%, and 3.8% respectively. All 6 DSM-5 prevalence estimates were slightly lower than their DSM-IV counterparts, although only 2 of these differences were statistically significant. DSM-5 PTSD prevalence was higher among women than among men, and prevalence increased with greater traumatic event exposure. Major reasons individuals met DSM-IV criteria, but not DSM-5 criteria were the exclusion of nonaccidental, nonviolent deaths from Criterion A, and the new requirement of at least 1 active avoidance symptom.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            International prevalence of adolescent non-suicidal self-injury and deliberate self-harm

            Background The behaviours of non-suicidal self-injury (NSSI) and deliberate self-harm (DSH) are prevalent among adolescents, and an increase of rates in recent years has been postulated. There is a lack of studies to support this postulation, and comparing prevalence across studies and nations is complicated due to substantial differences in the methodology and nomenclature of existing research. Methods We conducted a systematic review of current (2005 - 2011) empirical studies reporting on the prevalence of NSSI and DSH in adolescent samples across the globe. Results Fifty-two studies fulfilling the inclusion criteria were obtained for analysis. No statistically significant differences were found between NSSI (18.0% SD = 7.3) and DSH (16.1% SD = 11.6) studies. Assessment using single item questions led to lower prevalence rates than assessment with specific behaviour checklists. Mean prevalence rates have not increased in the past five years, suggesting stabilization. Conclusion NSSI and DSH have a comparable prevalence in studies with adolescents from different countries. The field would benefit from adopting a common approach to assessment to aide cross-cultural study and comparisons.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Hair cortisol as a biological marker of chronic stress: current status, future directions and unanswered questions.

              The detrimental effects of stress on human health are being increasingly recognized. There is a critical need for the establishment of a biomarker that accurately measures its intensity and course over time. Such a biomarker would allow monitoring of stress, increase understanding of its pathophysiology and may help identify appropriate and successful management strategies. Whereas saliva and urine cortisol capture real-time levels, hair cortisol analysis presents a complementary means of monitoring stress, capturing systemic cortisol exposure over longer periods of time. This novel approach for cortisol quantification is being increasingly used to identify the effects of stress in a variety of pathological situations, from chronic pain to acute myocardial infarctions. Because of its ability to provide a long-term, month-by-month measure of systemic cortisol exposure, hair cortisol analysis is becoming a useful tool, capable of answering clinical questions that could previously not be answered by other tests. In this paper we review the development, current status, limitations and outstanding questions regarding the use of hair cortisol as a biomarker of chronic stress. Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                aishah.snoek@sinaicentrum.nl
                a.beekman@ggzingeest.nl
                jack.dekker@arkin.nl
                inga.aarts@sinaicentrum.nl
                g.grootheest@ggzingeest.nl
                matthijs.blankers@arkin.nl
                c.vriend@amsterdamumc.nl
                oa.vandenheuvel@amsterdamumc.nl
                Kathleen.Thomaes@sinaicentrum.nl
                Journal
                BMC Psychiatry
                BMC Psychiatry
                BMC Psychiatry
                BioMed Central (London )
                1471-244X
                6 August 2020
                6 August 2020
                2020
                : 20
                : 396
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Arkin Sinai Centrum, Amstelveen, The Netherlands
                [2 ]GRID grid.7177.6, ISNI 0000000084992262, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Department of Psychiatry, ; Amsterdam, the Netherlands
                [3 ]GRID grid.484519.5, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Psychiatry, Amsterdam Neuroscience, ; Amsterdam, the Netherlands
                [4 ]GRID grid.484519.5, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Anatomy and Neurosciences, Amsterdam Neuroscience, ; Amsterdam, the Netherlands
                [5 ]GRID grid.420193.d, ISNI 0000 0004 0546 0540, GGZinGeest, Department of Psychiatry, ; Amsterdam, the Netherlands
                [6 ]Arkin Mental Health Care, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
                [7 ]GRID grid.12380.38, ISNI 0000 0004 1754 9227, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Faculty of Behavioural and Movement Sciences, ; Amsterdam, the Netherlands
                [8 ]GRID grid.416017.5, ISNI 0000 0001 0835 8259, Trimbos Institute, Institute of Mental Health and Addiction, ; Utrecht, the Netherlands
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8999-0244
                Article
                2713
                10.1186/s12888-020-02713-x
                7409691
                32762677
                2ca169b3-9910-4841-aac7-b9436b19e206
                © The Author(s) 2020

                Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

                History
                : 21 May 2019
                : 4 June 2020
                Funding
                Funded by: Stichting Steunfonds Joodse Geestelijke Gezondheidszorg
                Categories
                Study Protocol
                Custom metadata
                © The Author(s) 2020

                Clinical Psychology & Psychiatry
                emdr,ptsd,dialectical behaviour therapy,borderline personality disorder

                Comments

                Comment on this article