Cited by 42Personality Disorders and PsychopathologyPsychotherapy Techniques and ApplicationsPsychoanalysis and Psychopathology Research

Day hospital versus intensive out-patient mentalisation-based treatment for borderline personality disorder: multicentre randomised clinical trial

Open access
Smits, Maaike L., Feenstra, Dine J., Eeren, Hester V., Bales, Dawn L., Laurenssen, Elisabeth M. P., Blankers, Matthijs, Soons, Mirjam B. J., Dekker, Jack J. M. +3 more·2020·The British Journal of Psychiatry

Abstract

Background: Two types of mentalisation-based treatment (MBT) have been developed and empirically evaluated for borderline personality disorder (BPD): day hospital MBT (MBT-DH) and intensive out-patient MBT (MBT-IOP). No trial has yet compared their efficacy. Aims: To compare the efficacy of MBT-DH and MBT-IOP 18 months after start of treatment. MBT-DH was hypothesised to be superior to MBT-IOP because of its higher treatment intensity. Method: In a multicentre randomised controlled trial (Nederlands Trial Register: NTR2292) conducted at three sites in the Netherlands, patients with BPD were randomly assigned to MBT-DH (n = 70) or MBT-IOP (n = 44). The primary outcome was symptom severity (Brief Symptom Inventory). Secondary outcome measures included borderline symptomatology, personality functioning, interpersonal functioning, quality of life and self-harm. Patients were assessed every 6 months from baseline to 18 months after start of treatment. Data were analysed using multilevel modelling based on intention-to-treat principles. Results: Significant improvements were found on all outcome measures, with moderate to very large effect sizes for both groups. MBT-DH was not superior to MBT-IOP on the primary outcome measure, but MBT-DH showed a clear tendency towards superiority on secondary outcomes. Conclusions: Although MBT-DH was not superior to MBT-IOP on the primary outcome measure despite its greater treatment intensity, MBT-DH showed a tendency to be more effective on secondary outcomes, particularly in terms of relational functioning. Patients receiving MBT-DH and MBT-IOP, thus, seem to follow different trajectories of change, which may have important implications for clinical decision-making. Longer-term follow-up and cost-effectiveness considerations may ultimately determine the optimal intensity of specialised treatments such as MBT for patients with BPD.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1192/bjp.2019.9

Cites

26 of 26 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. First MB, Spitzer RL, Gibbon M, Williams JBW. Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV Axis I Disorders (SCID I). American Psychiatric Press, 1997.
  2. Distel MA, De Moor MHM, Boomsma DI. Dutch translation of the Personality Assessment Inventory -Borderline features scale (PAI-BOR): norms, factor structure and reliability. Psychologie en Gezondheid 2009; 37: 38-46.
  3. Rubin DB. Multiple Imputation for Survey Nonresponse. Wiley, 1987.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Smits, M. L., Feenstra, D. J., Eeren, H. V., Bales, D. L., Laurenssen, E. M. P., Blankers, M., Soons, M. B. J., Dekker, J. J. M., Lucas, Z., Verheul, R., & Luyten, P.
Affiliations
  • De Viersprong (NL)
  • Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam (NL)
  • Lentis (NL)
  • University College London (GB)
Corresponding author
Smits, Maaike L.
Venue
The British Journal of Psychiatry
Published
2019-02-22
Volume
216
Issue
2
Pages
79-84
ISSN
  • 0007-1250 (ISSN-L)
  • 1472-1465
OpenAlex
W2917532763
Cited by
42
References
26
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 1
FWCI
5.55
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • The British Journal of Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • VU Research Portal (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
  • Lirias (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • EUR Research Repository (Erasmus University Rotterdam) (submittedVersion)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
ZonMw (171202012)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Personality Disorders and Psychopathology
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychotherapy Techniques and Applications
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychoanalysis and Psychopathology Research
Keywords
borderline personality disorder, mentalization-based treatment, day hospital treatment, treatment intensity, symptom severity, interpersonal functioning, self-harm, quality of life, personality functioning
MeSH terms
Mentalization, Adult, Borderline Personality Disorder, Female, Hospitals, Humans, Male, Netherlands, Outpatients, Quality of Life, Self-Injurious Behavior, Treatment Outcome

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