Cited by 45Personality Disorders and PsychopathologyPsychotherapy Techniques and ApplicationsTreatment of Major Depression

Combined therapy of major depression with concomitant borderline personality disorder: comparison of interpersonal and cognitive psychotherapy

Open access
Bellino, Silvio, Zizza, Monica, Rinaldi, Camilla, Bogetto, Filippo·2007·The Canadian Journal of Psychiatry

Abstract

Objective: The combination of antidepressants and brief psychotherapies has been proven more efficacious in treating major depression and is particularly recommended in patients with concomitant personality disorders. We compare the effects of 2 combined therapies, fluoxetine and interpersonal therapy (IPT) or fluoxetine and cognitive therapy (CT), on major depression in patients with borderline personality disorder (BPD). Method: Thirty-five consecutive outpatients with a diagnosis of BPD and a major depressive episode (not bipolar and not psychotic) were enrolled. They were randomly assigned to 1 of the 2 combined treatments and treated for 24 weeks. Assessment included a semistructured interview, Clinical Global Impression (CGI) scale, Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS), Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HARS), Beck Depression Inventory-II (BDI-II), Social and Occupational Functioning Assessment Scale (SOFAS), Satisfaction Profile (SAT-P) for quality of life (QOL), and Inventory of Interpersonal Problems (IIP-64). Statistical analysis was performed using the univariate General Linear Model to calculate the effects of duration and type of treatment. Results: No significant differences between treatments were found at CGI, HDRS, BDI-II, and SOFAS score. Combined treatment with CT had greater effects on HARS score and on psychological functioning factor of SAT-P. Combined treatment with IPT was more effective on social functioning factor of SAT-P and on domains domineering or controlling and intrusive or needy of IIP-64. Conclusions: Both combined therapies are efficacious in treating major depression in patients with BPD. Differences between CT and IPT concern specific features of subjective QOL and interpersonal problems. These findings lack reliable comparisons and need to be replicated.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/070674370705201106

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Compared to IPT, CT showed better results for anxiety (moderate effect) and mental health status (small effect).

    “As compared to IPT, better results were found for CT for the outcomes anxiety (moderate effect) and mental health status (small effect).”

    From Psychological therapies for people with borderline personality disorder. (2012) · cites this paper as Bellino 2007

  • For depression, the difference between CT and IPT was marginal in size.

    “For the outcome of depression, the difference was marginal in size.”

    From Psychological therapies for people with borderline personality disorder. (2012) · cites this paper as Bellino 2007

  • Cognitive Therapy (CT) compared with CCT and IPT yielded no statistically significant differences for any outcome.

    “Both comparisons yielded no statistically significant differences for any outcome.”

    From Psychological therapies for people with borderline personality disorder. (2012) · cites this paper as Bellino 2007

  • In the IPT-BPD trial (Bellino 2010), allegiance effect was improbable at low risk because the working group seemed experienced in but not associated with IPT.

    “Allegiance effect improbable? Low risk The working group seems to be experienced in but not to be associated with IPT (cf. Bellino 2006;Bellino 2007).”

    From Psychological therapies for people with borderline personality disorder. (2012) · cites this paper as Bellino 2007

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 66 · Cited by 45

Authors
Bellino, S., Zizza, M., Rinaldi, C., & Bogetto, F.
Affiliations
University of Turin (IT)
Corresponding author
Bellino, Silvio
Venue
The Canadian Journal of Psychiatry
Published
2007-11
Volume
52
Issue
11
Pages
718-725
ISSN
  • 0706-7437 (ISSN-L)
  • 1497-0015
OpenAlex
W67379038
Cited by
45
References
66
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2024: 3 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 5
FWCI
0.73
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • The Canadian Journal of Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Institutional Research Information System University of Turin (University of Turin) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Personality Disorders and Psychopathology
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychotherapy Techniques and Applications
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Treatment of Major Depression
Keywords
major depressive disorder, borderline personality disorder, combined psychotherapy and pharmacotherapy, interpersonal psychotherapy, cognitive therapy, fluoxetine, quality of life, social functioning, interpersonal problems, anxiety symptoms
MeSH terms
Anxiety Disorders, Borderline Personality Disorder, Combined Modality Therapy, Major Depressive Disorder, Depressive Disorder, Major, Fluoxetine, Humans, Interpersonal Relations, Personal Satisfaction, Quality of Life, Severity of Illness Index, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors, Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review