Summary of findings 2. Dialectical Behaviour Therapy (DBT) versus general management (GM) according to APA guidelines for people with borderline personality disorder.
| DBT vs. general management according to APA guidelines for people with borderline personality disorders | ||||||
| Patient or population: patients with borderline personality disorder Settings: outpatient Intervention: DBT Comparison: general management (GM) | ||||||
| Outcomes | Illustrative comparative risks* (95% CI) | Relative effect (95% CI) | No of Participants (studies) | Quality of the evidence (GRADE) | Comments | |
| Assumed risk | Corresponding risk | |||||
| GM | DBT | |||||
| BPD total severity ZAN‐BPD1 total Follow‐up: mean 12 months | The mean BPD total severity score in the control groups was 8.16 points | The mean BPD total severity score in the intervention groups was 0.04 standard deviations lower (0.33 lower to 0.25 higher) | 180 (1 study) | ⊕⊕⊕⊝ moderate2 | ||
| Inappropriate anger ‐ DBT vs. GM STAXI3‐anger out Follow‐up: mean 12 months | The mean inappropriate anger score ‐ DBT vs. GM in the control groups was 5.11 points | The mean inappropriate anger score ‐ DBT vs. GM in the intervention groups was 0.03 standard deviations lower (0.32 lower to 0.26 higher) | 180 (1 study) | ⊕⊕⊕⊝ moderate2 | ||
| Parasuicidality ‐ DBT vs. GM mean no. of suicidal and self‐injurious episodes Follow‐up: mean 12 months | The mean parasuicidality score ‐ DBT vs. GM in the control groups was 12.87 points | The mean parasuicidality score ‐ DBT vs. GM in the intervention groups was 0.23 standard deviations lower (0.52 lower to 0.06 higher) | 180 (1 study) | ⊕⊕⊕⊝ moderate2 | ||
| Interpersonal problems ‐ DBT vs. GM IIP‐C4 total Follow‐up: mean 12 months | The mean interpersonal problems score ‐ DBT vs. GM in the control groups was 101.58 points | The mean interpersonal problems score ‐ DBT vs. GM in the intervention groups was 0.03 standard deviations lower (0.32 lower to 0.26 higher) | 180 (1 study) | ⊕⊕⊕⊝ moderate2 | ||
| *The basis for the assumed risk (e.g. the median control group risk across studies) is provided in footnotes. The corresponding risk (and its 95% confidence interval) is based on the assumed risk in the comparison group and the relative effect of the intervention (and its 95% CI). CI: Confidence interval | ||||||
| GRADE Working Group grades of evidence High quality: Further research is very unlikely to change our confidence in the estimate of effect. Moderate quality: Further research is likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and may change the estimate. Low quality: Further research is very likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and is likely to change the estimate. Very low quality: We are very uncertain about the estimate. | ||||||
1Zanarini rating scale for borderline personality disorder 2Total sample size less than 400 3Spielberger Anger Expression Scale 4Inventory of interpersonal problems‐Circumplex Scales