Cognitive Therapy versus Rogerian Supportive Therapy in Borderline Personality Disorder
Cottraux J.a · Note I.D.d · Boutitie F.b · Milliery M.d · Genouihlac V.a · Yao S.N.a · Note B.d · Mollard E.a · Bonasse F.d · Gaillard S.c · Djamoussian D.d · de Mey Guillard C.a · Culem A.a · Gueyffier F.c
Two-Year Follow-Up of a Controlled Pilot Study
aAnxiety Disorder Unit, Hospices Civils de Lyon, Hôpital Neurologique, bService de Biostatistique, Hospices Civils de Lyon, UMR 5558, and cClinical Investigation Centre, Inserm, CIC201, 69677 CHU de Lyon, Lyon, and dAssistance Publique de Marseille, Behaviour Therapy Unit, CHU de Marseille, Marseille, France
Do you have an account?
- Rent for 48h to view
- Buy Cloud Access for unlimited viewing via different devices
- Synchronizing in the ReadCube Cloud
- Printing and saving restrictions apply
Rental: USD 8.50
Cloud: USD 20.00
Article / Publication Details
Background: To date, there have been no studies comparing cognitive therapy (CT) with Rogerian supportive therapy (RST) in borderline personality disorder. Method: Sixty-five DSM-IV borderline personality disorder outpatients were recruited at 2 centres: Lyon and Marseille. Thirty-three patients were randomly allocated to CT and 32 to RST. The therapists were the same in both groups. Both treatments shared the same duration (1 year) and amount of therapy. Assessment by independent evaluators utilised the Clinical Global Impression (CGI) Scale, the Hamilton Depression Scale, Beck Depression Inventory, Beck Anxiety Inventory, Hopelessness Scale, Young Schema Questionnaire II, Eysenck Impulsivity Venturesomeness Empathy (IVE) Inventory, a self-harming behaviours checklist and scales measuring quality of life and the therapeutic relationship. The response criterion was a score of 3 or less on the CGI, associated with a Hopelessness Scale score of <8. Results: No patient committed suicide during the trial. Fifty-one patients were evaluated at week 24, 38 at week 52 and 21 at week 104. Cognitive therapy retained the patients in therapy for a longer time. The response criterion found no significant between-group differences at any measurement point in the completers. However, at week 24, CT was better than RST on the Hopelessness Scale, IVE scale and regarding the therapeutic relationship. At week 104, the CGI improvement (patient and evaluator) was significantly better in CT than in RST. High baseline depression and impulsivity predicted dropouts. Conclusions: CT retained the patients in therapy longer, showed earlier positive effects on hopelessness and impulsivity, and demonstrated better long-term outcomes on global measures of improvement.
© 2009 S. Karger AG, Basel
Article / Publication Details
Copyright / Drug Dosage / DisclaimerCopyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher or, in the case of photocopying, direct payment of a specified fee to the Copyright Clearance Center.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.