Schema Therapy for Forensic Patients with Personality Disorders Manual 5: “Management Manual” By David Bernstein and Lieke Nentjes This manual has been prepared for review by the “Erkenningscommissie” at the request of the “Programma Kwaliteit Forensische Zorg (KFZ).” Table of contents 1. Selection of forensic patients participating in ST………………………………… 3 1.1. Instruments used to assess (contra)indications for ST………………..3 1.1.1. Personality pathology……………………………………….….3 1.1.2. Axis I disorders………………………………………………… 4 1.1.3. IQ and neuropsychological impairment…………………....... 4 1.1.4. Cut-offs to determine indications and required expertise..…4 1.2. Selection procedure and discontinuation of ST……………………….. 5 1.2.1. Selection……………………………………………………...… 5 1.2.2. Timing…………………………………………………………....5 1.2.3. Discontinuation after the start of ST…………………………. 5 1.3. Engagement and motivation…………………………………………….. 6 1.3.1. Selection of offenders on the basis of motivation………...…6 1.3.2. Monitoring of motivation during the program………………...6 1.3.3. Getting sufficient patients to participate in ST…………….…8 1.3.4. Motivation of personnel and monitoring of this motivation… 9 2. Continuity……………………………………………………………………………...10 2.1. How does ST fit in the complete treatment approach?……….……….10 2.2. Patient guidance during ST and warranting of concurrent continuity..10 2.3. Criminogenic factors targeted in ST and addressed outside of ST…. 11 2.4. Attending to aftercare and relapse prevention in ST…………………..12 2.5. Maintenance of results obtained with ST………………………………. 14 2.6. Guidance in re-entering society and warranting follow-up continuity.. 14 2.7. Transfer, generalization, and durability of ST in other contexts……... 16 2.7.1. ST in other social contexts……………………………………. 16 2.7.2. ST in other institutional contexts………………….………….. 17 2.8. The duration of ST and aftercare……………………………………….. 18 2.8.1. Duration of ST……………………….…………………………. 18 2.8.2. Duration of aftercare…………………………………………... 20 2.9. Roles of professionals in concurrent and follow-up continuity………. 21 3. Intervention Integrity…………………………………...……………………………. 23 3.1. Means and facilities necessary for the implementation of ST……….. 23 3.2. Professional competencies required from the organization…………..23 1 3.3. The organizational structure needed to implement ST……………….. 24 3.4. Selection, training, and supervision of ST therapists…………………. 24 3.4.1. Training…………………………………………………………. 24 3.4.2. Selection and competence……….…………………………… 24 3.4.3. Supervision, support, and continuity……….…………………25 3.5. The monitoring of patients……………………………………………….. 26 3.6. Implementation and monitoring the quality of ST………………….......27 References……………………………………………………………………………….29 2 The purpose of this manual is to give institutions and treatment providers direction in the implementation of forensic Schema Therapy (ST), providing guidance in management decisions for ST patients in clinical or ambulant settings. First, we will describe how to decide which patients are indicated for forensic ST and how patients’ motivation is addressed in its implementation. Then, we will give an outline of how ST fits in the broader treatment context of forensic patients (i.e., “concurrent continuity”) and of how its effects are warranted after treatment has ended (i.e., “follow-up continuity”). Last, guidelines are given on how to safe-guard the quality of ST with respect to e.g., treatment integrity and the contextual conditions for successful implementation of the program. 1. Selection of forensic patients participating in ST As described in Theoretical Manual, the main indication for patients to start forensic ST is the presence of a cluster B or Paranoid Personality Disorder (PD), or a PD Not Otherwise Specified with 5 cluster B PD traits. Contraindications for ST include comorbidity with a psychotic disorder, bipolar disorder, autism, and alcohol and/or drug dependence. In addition, patients are contraindicated for ST when having a full scale IQ of lower than 80. We refer to the Theoretical Manual for more detailed information on these (contra)indications and a description of the rationale behind them. In order to determine whether patients are indicated for ST, well-validated instruments should be adopted. Below we discuss the types of instruments that should be used to screen and select patients. 1.1. Instruments used to assess (contra)indications for ST 1.1.1. Personality pathology. In our clinical trial on the effectiveness of ST, patients were included if suffering from one or more of 4 PDs – Antisocial, Borderline, Narcissistic, or Paranoid PD – or significant Cluster B traits, that is, Cluster B PD NOS (operationalized by us as 5 or more Cluster B PD traits and no other DSM PD). However, the indications for ST for forensic patients are broader, including any DSM-IV PD or PDNOS (for more detail on the rationale behind the selection of PDs and applicability of ST for other PDs, see the Theoretical Manual). The presence of DSM-IV PDs might be determined using the SCID for Axis II Personality Disorders (SCID-II; First, Spitzer, Gibbon, Williams, & Benjamin, 1994) or the Structured Interview for DSM-IV Personality Disorders (SIDP-IV; Pfohl, Blum, & Zimmerman, 1995), which are semi- 3 structured interviews that assess PDs based on information provided by the patient supplemented with collateral and dossier information. The interrater reliability of these instruments has found to be very good in both forensic (e.g., Bernstein et al., 2012) and nonforensic (e.g., Nentjes et al., 2013; Røysamb et al., 2011) samples. 1.1.2. Axis I disorders. The presence of Axis I disorders (except for ASS) is preferably assessed using semi-structured methods as well, like the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV Axis I disorders (SCID-I; First, Spitzer, Gibbon, & Williams, 1997). Zanarini et al. (2000) found the interrater reliability of the SCID-I to be good to excellent; test-retest reliability was also adequate for most disorders. A study by Lobbestael, Leurgans, and Arntz (2011) revealed moderate to excellent interrater agreement of Axis I disorders using the SCID-I. In order to determine whether a patient is suffering from an ASS, multi–modal methods are recommended (e.g., patient and collateral informant interviewing complemented with multiple observer ratings). 1.1.3. IQ and neuropsychological impairment. Intelligence should also be assessed using a psychometrically sound instrument, like e.g., the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale–III (WAIS–III; Wechsler, 1997). In many TBS clinics, IQ is estimated using all the scales of this measure, yet if for practical reasons test administration cannot include a full WAIS-IlI, a shortened IQ test might be administered. For example, in our clinical trial we have used a shortened version of the WAIS–III (based on the subtests Block Design and Vocabulary, which correlates highly with IQs derived using all WAIS– III scales; Jeyakumar, Warriner, & Raval, 2004). (See the Evaluation Manual, under measures, for more details on other measures that might be used to assess other variables that are relevant when treating forensic patients with ST, like psychopathy level, predicted risk, and general symptomatology). 1.1.4. Cut-offs to determine indications and required expertise. The cut–offs used to determine the presence of the disorders that might constitute (contra) indications for forensic ST are those described in the DSM–IV (American Psychiatric Association, 2000). The cut-off for intelligence a full scale IQ of > 80. In order to administer the measures like those described above, a minimum level of expertise is required, including being trained to reliably administer and score these instruments (e.g., reaching good interrater agreement with other independent raters). 4 1.2. Selection procedure and discontinuation of ST 1.2.1. Selection. When implementing ST in a forensic inpatient setting, one might want to follow the selection procedure that we have adopted in our clinical trial on the effectiveness of ST as a guideline (see the Evaluation Manual). In inpatient treatment, such a process might entail a treatment coordinator clinically referring a patient on the basis of the diagnostic procedures carried out in a clinic (i.e., on the basis of PD pathology, sufficient cognitive functioning etc.). A patient is then approached by a ST therapist, or another staff member that is knowledgeable about ST, who has a conversation in which (s)he explained what ST entails, answers potential questions that the patient might have about ST, and subsequently asks whether the individual would be willing to start ST. (If a patient is unwilling to cooperate with any treatment, techniques like motivational interviewing might be used [see below]). After this process, the patient starts with his first ST session. When implementing ST on an outpatient basis, one might want to follow a similar process, in which patients are indicated for ST by an intake team as part of the treatment process. 1.2.2. Timing. It ought to be possible for inpatients to start their initial ST session three to four weeks after institutionalization, if sufficient resources are available (which is very clinic dependent). However, the timing of ST might vary considerably, primarily because of waiting lists caused by limited availability of therapists and varying patient flow. Although ideally patients start psychotherapy as soon as possible, we believe that ST will still be effective when given a while after the patient has entered TBS, as many of these offenders are characterized by a long history of institutionalization to begin with. 1.2.3. Discontinuation after the start of ST. There might be reason for discontinuation of treatment after the start of ST. ST might be stopped when a patient destabilizes, due to e.g., psychosis or mood disorders. In this case, attempts should be made to stabilize the patient, so that after stabilization ST can be continued. Although serious behavioral problems (like drug use or physical violence) might often times be a reason to transfer an inpatient to a different forensic institution, ST generally tries to address problems that might threaten treatment progress, providing the patient with structural support to stop self–defeating behavior and to make adjustments in order to be able to stay in a setting. Using ST, attempts should be made to address factors that hinder treatment progress by conceptualizing lack of motivation and trouble engaging in 5 therapy in terms of Schema Modes, using techniques to flip patients into more productive modes (see the Program Manual, for more detail on these techniques). Because of the severity of the problems in many forensic PD patients, ST therapists should fully engage in this latter process in a sustained effort to get patients to cooperate. This latter process might even form one of the initial focuses of ST for many patients. If, however, after 1.5 to 2 years little progress has been accomplished after extensive efforts to overcome blockages, ST might have to be stopped. 1.3. Engagement and motivation 1.3.1 Selection of participating offenders on the basis of motivation. As described earlier (see the Theoretical Manual), patient motivation is not a (contra)indication for forensic ST. In ST, motivation is seen as a dynamic rather than a static concept (Drieschner, Lammers, & van der Staak, 2004), and stuck points in therapy are conceptualized in terms of unproductive Schema Modes. In addressing motivational issues, therapists use techniques in which reference is being made to these emotional states in order to achieve therapy progress (see the Program Manual for a description of these techniques). In this way, it is expected that over the course of therapy modes will still fluctuate, yet, these fluctuations will get lesser in frequency and intensity. In a sub-study in our RCT on the effectiveness of ST (see the Evalution Manual for more detail on this RCT), for example, we are currently rating the modes of several participating patients over three phases of therapy (3, 18, and 36 months). Of each patient, the modes that occur within five videotaped therapy sessions of each phase are rated using the Mode Observation Scale (Bernstein, de Vos, & van den Broek, 2009). Over time we expect modes to be still fluctuating more or less around the mean of the particular phase in therapy, yet we expect patients’ mean scores (of the five tapes within each phase) on maladaptive modes to go down, and healthy mode scores to go up as therapy progresses. 1.3.2. Monitoring of motivation during the program. An first important element of therapists’ monitoring of patients’ motivation lies in attending to the therapeutic setting and boundaries (i.e., “the frame of therapy”), such as the meeting time, the frequency of therapy, what the arrangements are when a patient misses a session etc. Patient behaviors that have to do with the frame of therapy can be an indication for a change in motivation, for example, when a patient misses sessions, does not come one time, 6 frequently asks for special favors etc. The ST therapist monitors such indications, and conceptualizes them in terms of Schema Modes. For example, a patient tries to manipulate the therapist into getting certain privileges could be reflective of the “Conning and Manipulative Mode,” which the therapist can then address (see the Program Manual for the techniques used to do so). Secondly, patients’ motivational levels can be reflected in the therapeutic working alliance, which has consistently found to be related to client’s motivation (e.g., Taft, Murphy, Musser, & Remington, 2004) and is predictive of treatment outcome over a variety of disorders and therapy schools (Horvath & Symonds, 1991). We teach our ST therapists to be aware of these associations, stressing the importance of monitoring changes in alliance as a means to keep track of patients’ motivation. A widely used conceptualization defines this alliance, or therapeutic relationship as consisting of a) agreement on the tasks assigned to both therapist and client, b) agreement on the goals of therapy, and c) a strong emotional bond of mutual trust, acceptance, and confidence (Bordin, 1979; Horvath & Greenberg, 1989). The therapist should monitor these three aspects, and if the alliance seems deficient in some way, the ST therapist should also try to conceptualize these obstacles in terms of Schema Modes. For example, when a patient doesn’t want to engage in an experiential or behavioral exercise (i.e., a task of ST), or when the patient has trouble trusting the therapist (interfering with the bond), the therapist examines which mode(s) block the patient’s trust and willingness to carry out exercises. The therapist may want to use standardized assessment methods for the assessment of the alliance, like the Working Alliance Inventory (Horvath & Greenberg, 1989). We do not suggest that the use of such instruments is a requirement for monitoring the therapy relationship in ST, yet it may enhance therapists’ ability to do so. We do stress the importance of regularly assessing patients’ modes over the course of therapy, using measures that tap into patients’ Schema Modes, e.g., the Schema Mode Inventory (SMI; Lobbestael et al., 2010) in order to structurally asses the modes that may underlie motivational issues, as these are the direct target of ST. Although we do not have data on how forensic patients’ motivation is related to therapy progress yet, our clinical trial will enable us to look at this relationship. That is, in our RCT, a variety of measures of psychotherapy process variables are administered to both patient and therapist (i.e., the Working Alliance Inventory, Horvath & Greenberg, 1989; Difficult Doctor-Patient Relationship Questionnaire – Ten item version, Hahn, Thompson, Wils, Stern & Budner, 1994; the Treatment Motivation Scales for Forensic 7 Outpatient Treatment, Drieschner, 2005; the Treatment Engagement Rating Scale for Forensic Outpatient Treatment, Drieschner, 2005). The measures are given in the early (3 months), middle (18 months), and late (36 months) phases of therapy, enabling us to investigate the relationship between clinical therapy progress variables (e.g., PD symptoms, Schema Modes, recidivism risk) and motivation. Indirect evidence that supports the notion that ST adequately motivates patients to engage in therapy is its low drop-out rate. There is substantial evidence that PD diagnoses are associated with elevated drop-out rates from a variety of therapies (e.g. Gibbon et al., 2010; Miller, Brown, & Sees, 2004). Keeping this in mind, the high retention rates of around 75% that have been achieved with long term ST in nonforensic patients with PDs are the more impressive (Bamelis & Arntz, 2012; Giesenbloo et al., 2006). Similarly, in our own preliminary sample of 30 forensic ST patients, only 3 (18.8%) of the ST patients dropped out (versus 5 of the TAU patients [35.7%]; Bernstein et al, 2012), suggesting that the forensic adaptation of ST is successful in motivating and retaining patients. 1.3.3. Getting sufficient patients to participate in ST. As forensic patients can often times be very distrustful, it is especially important to be clear and transparent about the goals and tasks of ST, and to give patients sufficient opportunity to ask questions before and during therapy. Apart from that, we think that ST in itself is an effective means to keep patients to participate in treatment. As mentioned earlier, ST has proven to be successful at retaining nonforensic patients with borderline PD (Giesen-Bloo et at., 2006), as well as with cluster-C, Paranoid, Histrionic and/or Narcissistic PD (Bamelis & Arntz, 2012). We believe this low drop-out to be at least partially dependent on the nature of ST in that it is successful in fostering an attachment bond between therapist and patient. Evidence for this notion comes from a study by Spinhoven and colleagues (2007), who demonstrated the therapist and patient rated alliance to be significantly higher in ST than in a psychodynamic form of psychotherapy. In turn, growth of the therapeutic relationship was identified as an important mediating mechanism in the reduction of BPD pathology. In working with forensic patients, we consider it to be especially important to maintain a sufficient level of motivation through the working alliance in order to be able to give patients a sufficient dosage of ST for it to have beneficial effects, and to prevent patients from dropping out. 8 Another reason to believe that getting sufficient patients to participate in ST should not be a problem is that in inpatient contexts, there is an incentive for patients to participate in therapy: forensic patients know that engagement in therapy is necessary as a means to re-entry the community at some point, as this will only take place if they cooperate and are judged to have improved. In our ongoing RCT on ST, very few patients have refused to take part or have dropped-out. However, we recognize that the TBS inpatients population will likely shrink, creating a shift from inpatient treatment to treatment in alternative contexts, like prisons or ambulant settings. We do not have any data on ST’s drop-out rates in such institutions. Therefore, we will have to potentially look at the institutional issues in these different settings in order to make adjustments to the ST approach so as to assure sufficient patient retention. 1.3.4. Motivation of personnel and monitoring of this motivation Given the challenges of learning ST and working with forensic patients with severe PDs, we stress that therapists’ regular supervision or peer supervision sessions are necessary to ensure the effective delivery of ST in forensic settings (Bernstein et al., 2007). These meetings are extremely important in order to monitor, guide, and support therapists, to warrant continuity in the delivery of ST, and to enable therapists to do their job effectively. As an example, in our RCT, therapists receive supervision on a bi- weekly basis, during which their potential motivational issues are addressed. A striking observation that we have made within our research project is that very few of the therapists who have completed the forensic ST training program have discontinued their involvement with forensic ST or left the setting in which they are treating patients. In our RCT, we have had very few instances in which therapists had to be replaced. Anecdotal evidence suggests that therapists consistently refer to ST as a means to keep them motivated in the treatment of this difficult patient group, as well as supplying them with a feeling of being more self-efficacious as a therapist. Being nonspecific factors that influence therapy, this self-efficacy and feeling of optimism that ST realizes are likely to have a beneficial effect on patients. In our experience, ST seems to prevent therapist burn-out, as well as to keep therapists feeling effective and engaged, which is very important as therapist continuity is essential in forming an attachment relationship with the patient. 9 2. Continuity 2.1. How does ST fit in the complete treatment approach of the patient? From a larger perspective, ST needs to be viewed as part of a trajectory of treatment, an integrated part of a larger whole. This includes embedding ST in the institutional contexts within which the therapy is delivered. This creates the ability to transfer ST from an individual form of therapy to one that includes the entire therapeutic milieu (i.e., ensuring concurrent continuity). For example, it is recommended that the ST therapist presents the rest of the treatment team with patients’ case conceptualizations, teaching other staff members to understand and discuss patients’ problems in terms of Schema Modes. This conceptualization can be mapped onto treatment indications creating a shared focus for treatment. ST is also embedded in the institution, in that the ST therapist uses the situations that patients deal with on a daily basis (i.e., conflicts with other staff members or patients) as a basis for therapy. E.g., patients learn to identify what types of situations trigger their modes, and later on in therapy, situations outside of the therapy are used for behavioral experiments (see below, for more detail on this embedding of ST in the overarching setting). 2.2. Patient guidance during ST and warranting of concurrent continuity In forensic clinics, the responsibility for patients’ treatment usually lies with a head of the treatment team (“hoofd behandeling”), whereas more daily coaching is provided by psychiatric nurses (“socio-therapeuten”), one of which often times is a patient’s primary mentor. When implementing ST, it is recommended for the ST therapist(s) to be getting a key role in the treatment process. (S)he provides the patient with supervision in identifying and changing maladaptive behavioral patterns, which can be done on the basis on the day to day interactions that the patient has within the institution. We encourage the ST therapist to be a coach to the treatment team and to school the team in the language of ST. The ST therapist presents the team with the case conceptualization in which patients’ risk factors are conceptualized in terms of Schema Modes, teaching the staff to understand patients’ problems in terms of ST language and creating a shared focus for all the staff involved with a patient. In this way, a common language is provided which the therapist can use to guide the treatment team in their interventions in their daily interaction with a patient. In that sense, the therapist plays an important role in overseeing the complete treatment, facilitating the continuity of the treatment focus. 10 This approach also applies to other components of the patient’s treatment that are guided by (para)professionals that do not necessarily have a therapeutic background. therapy). An example would be conducting work within the clinic (vocational Many patients have problems with adequately functioning in a working environment, which means that such situations provide them with learning opportunities. If a clinic is well coordinated, information on patients functioning and interaction in such situations is communicated to the ST therapist, who uses this information to help the patient understand the Schema Modes that block successful functioning in this situation. Moreover, the therapist helps the patient to develop more healthy strategies to use in similar situations. In this manner, a variety of different aspects of patients’ life and activities in the clinic can provide the interactions that can be used as practice and learning experiences discussed in ST. We recommend the ST therapist(s) to be given an explicit facilitative role in communicating with the range of individuals that work with the patient in these different situations, ensuring effective supervision of the patient by these other staff members. Over time, we have observed more effective collaboration (“teamwork”) between the various disciplines within institutions (e.g., nurses, psychotherapists, creative therapists), and within each specialized treatment unit. Moreover, psychiatric nurses report greater feelings of efficacy and more manageable counter-transference reactions, resulting in a more supportive and less punitive stance towards patients. Over time, these developments contribute to a more positive atmosphere on the treatment units for both patients and staff. We have not yet conducted systematic research on the implementation of ST; however, systematic evaluation of ST program implementation is clearly indicated, as it provides a model that can be copied by other institutions. 2.3. Criminogenic factors targeted in ST and addressed outside of ST In the context of generalizing the effects of ST after therapy has ended (i.e., ensuring follow-up continuity), we make a distinction between internal and external dynamic risk factors. In ST, internal risk factors are conceptualized as dysfunctional Schema Modes, which constitute the direct focus of treatment (see the Theoretical Manual for more detail on this conceptualization). However, in order to prevent patients from recidivating, it is also necessary to counteract the effects of external risk factors, such as a social network in which the patient is confronted with criminals and drug users, and stressors like poverty, homelessness, unemployment, stress brought about by 11 interaction with family and within relationships, and barriers to services like psychiatric or psychological help. In terms of these risk factors, ST operates in a more indirect fashion, by virtue of changing the maladaptive modes that give rise to the amplification of external risk factors, and by strengthening the healthy modes that protect the patient from such influences. For example, after inpatient treatment, patients will inevitably be confronted with stressful, difficult situations in the context of e.g., trying to obtain custody over a child or experiencing frustration over unemployment and having to work with job service agencies. ST teaches the patient to deal with the frustration that these types of situations can trigger by decreasing the intensity of the maladaptive modes that would normally be evoked (e.g., “Angry Child Mode” in which the patient feels and expresses uncontrolled anger or rage in response to the feeling of being treated unjustly, Bernstein et al., 2007). In addition, ST enhances the healthy side of the patient, by teaching him to be patient and persistent in such stressful encounters, and not allowing himself to derail and let situations escalate. In that way, ST has an indirect effect that can mitigate external risk factors and potentiate protective factors, supporting follow-up continuity of its effect. We see that in order to warrant complete follow-up continuity of care for these patients, it would be desirable to address external risk factors more directly after ST has ended. However, we believe that this is beyond the scope of forensic inpatient ST and should rather occur on a societal, systemic level. Whether this can happen is very much dependent on factors like budgets in social services, financial circumstances, where the patient comes to live, subtle influences of discrimination and stereotyping, etc. In order to manage such criminogenic factors, these might have to be addressed by a caseworker that would e.g., help the patient move to another locality away from the patients’ criminal network, or that would facilitate contact with needed social services. Such a direct influence on risk factors operating on patient’s environment would happen outside of ST. 2.4. Attending to aftercare and relapse prevention in ST In Dutch forensic clinics, the “resocialization” phase (which entails the gradual reintroduction of the patient into the community) provides a bridge to patients’ aftercare. As patients begin to go through resocialization, forensic ST increasingly focuses on aftercare and relapse prevention planning. One aspect of treatment in the majority of forensic clinics, is making a crime scenario analysis to base relapse prevention planning 12 on. In ST, a patient’s crime scenario is explained in terms of Schema Modes and triggers for these emotional states, forming the basis for the development of relapse prevention plans. The therapist teaches the patient to recognize risk factors (Schema Modes), and together with the therapist the patient begins to develop strategies to address these risk factors. For example, if a patient has a strong addiction history, relapse would focus on Schema Modes that represent risk factors for relapse. The patient could e.g. be characterized by a pattern of getting involved in relationships with dependent and unstable women, based on modes that represent the need for control. Such relationships might have initiated a cycle where the patient and his partner, due to the emotionally unstable nature of the relationship, both start to rely on alcohol and drugs, resulting in the patient’s aggressive behavior. In ST, relapse planning is incorporated by having the therapist help the patient to identify such risk factors and guide the patient in developing the capacity to choose for more healthy alternatives, thereby avoiding such external risk factors in the future. The Schema Mode conceptualization of a patient can also guide in choosing appropriate aftercare. The type of support that patients would get within such aftercare would be dependent on the type of problems that are salient for the patient. For example, if a patient’s criminal history involves being easily triggered in interactions with other drug or alcohol users, resulting in violence and anger, this patient might not benefit as much from treatment programs in which he is confronted with other addicts like e.g., a twelve-step program in the context of relapse prevention. Such a program might put the patient at risk for getting into situations similar to his crime scenario. Rather, an aftercare program might be preferred that has explicit and ongoing attention to the social network of the patient, based on the people that he encounters there, as there is ample evidence that healthy social networks play an important role in relapse prevention and resocialization (e.g., Douglas & Reeves, 2010). Another example of tailoring aftercare based on the Schema Modes that a patient is characterized by is that of BPD patients who maintain to have difficulties in their daily functioning due to a strong genetically based instability in their emotional regulation. Even though PD pathology and risk have gone down over the course of inpatient treatment, issues like instability in relationships, impulsivity and affective dysfunction (conceptualized in terms of Schema Modes) can remain salient for these patients. In these cases, aftercare should focus on these issues and help the patient to create structure in his environment. Relapse planning could in such a case also include 13 choosing more traditional interventions on the basis of patients’ schema conceptualization, like daycare. For patients who were institutionalized because of a diagnosis of Antisocial PD (ASPD) or psychopathy, a particular concern that should be paid attention to in aftercare is patients’ potential exposure to antisocial networks, which includes involvement in antisocial activities in a covert way (i.e., having a hidden agenda; i.e., Conning and Manipulative Mode, Bernstein et al., 2007). Recent research shows that a high-quality bond between community correction officers and offenders is an important predictor of offenders’ deterrence from criminal recidivism, protecting from re-arrest in both offenders with and without personality pathology (Kennealy, Skeem, Manchak, & Eno Louden, 2012). A specific recommendation for ASPD patients would therefore be to provide the patient with a (para)professional outside of the clinic who the patient can generalize his attachment bond with his therapist to. Ideally, probation and parole officers would be familiar with the concepts of ST in order to facilitate continuity of care and relapse prevention as much as possible. 2.5. Maintenance of results obtained with ST During ST, the therapist helps the patient as much as possible in developing the abilities to make healthy choices after inpatient treatment has ended. Like described before, this would include choices that enhance protective factors available in the patient’s environment. Of course, only some of this process can be achieved by the time the patient leaves the clinic. On the one hand, ST in the clinic can help to strengthen patients’ capacity to make sound choices. Risky situations during resocialization can provide the patient with opportunities in which these skills can be applied and further developed. On the other hand, continued counseling in the form of e.g., ambulant ST could be important in supporting and maintaining new skills, especially those needed to deal with everyday life outside of the clinic, in that manner lowering patient recidivism. 2.6. Guidance in re-entering society and warranting follow-up continuity Follow-up continuity becomes more challenging once the patient no longer falls within the jurisdiction of the institution in which he received ST, for example, when he is transferred from a TBS clinic to an ambulant, outpatient clinic, or is placed under the supervision of parole or probation. These transitions can be periods of increased risk for recidivism, because of the loss of institutional support. Thus, maintaining and 14 strengthening gains from ST during and after these transitions is clearly warranted. In some cases, patients can be transferred to outpatient facilities where they can continue ST with a new therapist, if further therapy is indicated. We believe that PD patients in general, especially those who already got ST, would benefit greatly from such continued care with ST in an ambulant setting. However, in some cases, this is not possible to arrange. We haven’t developed guidelines of what aftercare should look like after inpatient forensic ST, yet, if one were to develop such guidelines these should be evidence-based on what we know about the risk and protective factors after release. That is, on the short-term, aftercare should focus on factors like education and work, housing, and financial stability (Nicholls, Brink, Desmarais, Webster, & Martin, 2006), and, on the long run, on the development of a prosocial network and avoidance of criminal social influences (Douglas & Reeves, 2010). The planning of such reintegration (e.g., housing, social support) has found to be essential in preventing recidivism (see Willis & Grace [2008] for an example in sex offenders). In general, guidelines for case-managers that work with the patient after discharge should focus on the awareness and facilitation of these factors and should prescribe case-managers to perform regular risk assessments using psychometrically sound methods, monitoring risk and protective factors in a structural way so that quick and effective intervention is enabled when necessary. Ideally, caseworkers are trained to have a basic understanding of the ST concepts so that after patients have received inpatient ST, caseworkers can continue to talk about patients’ potential risk factors and problems in terms of Schema Modes. When adopting a compassionate stance towards the patient, in which a caseworker uses techniques like limit setting and tries to understand patients’ problems in terms of Schema Modes, the patient can generalize the attachment bonds that he formed with his ST therapist in inpatient treatment to the case-worker, facilitating re-entry into the community. To facilitate greater continuity of care for ST patients, Bernstein and colleagues are developing a “self-help” model which makes ST accessible to offenders, their families, and the people who work with them, as offenders re-integrate into the community. The idea is to spread ST concepts via easy to use materials, such as selfhelp books, websites, and DVDs, which are specifically targeted to offenders and those in their social networks. In addition, training programs would be created to teach basic ST skills to non-professionals. For example, training parole officers in basic ST concepts and practices can provide continuity of care for ST patients who have 15 completed treatment, but are still under supervision. Similarly, organizations that provide outreach to offenders and their families could offer training courses in ST “selfhelp.” Such programs could be of great benefit to families who struggle to help exoffenders reintegrate into society. Because the ST “language” is easy to understand, it can be readily taught to non-professionals. Thus, ST can become a medium which makes greater continuity of care possible for offenders. David Bernstein and a Swiss psychiatrist, dr. Dorothee Klecha, are completing work on a ST self-help book, which they plan to pilot test in 2013. The book addresses the problems faced by offenders; it is written in a simple, conversational style, using the “language” of Schema Modes. The development of an ST self-help model could have significant benefits for offenders who often “fall through the cracks” of the forensic system, when they leave detention. 2.7. Transfer, generalization, and durability of ST in other contexts 2.7.1. Transfer, generalization, and durability of ST in other social contexts. As previously described, the patient and his ST therapist continually work together in using all situations that the patient encounters on a daily basis to learn and develop new insights and coping strategies. When the patient encounters difficulties outside of the therapy, the therapist uses these examples to, together with the patient, identify the Schema Modes that stand in the way of adequate functioning in interpersonal situations. In this way, the patient’s activities in the clinic form the “grist for the mill” of ST, enabling the patient to develop new skills to deal with such encounters. For many forensic patients, for example, Schema Modes that reflect distrust are highly salient. During the first 1 to 1.5 years of therapy, ST focuses on the therapy relationship, slowly developing trust. After this period, part of ST is to generalize this trust to other social relationships that the patient has in the institutional environment e.g., a socio-therapist or treatment coordinator. The ST therapist makes the patient understand distress in these relationships in terms of Schema Modes. For example, when a patient has had a conflict with someone, and avoided the situation as a means of coping, the therapist might encourage the patient to engage in a behavioral experiment. In such an experiment, the patient would be motivated to approach the other person and talk about the assumptions that underlie his avoidance behavior, like the notion that the other is not interested in him, in order to correct such mistaken perceptions. In this way, ST functions as a platform that can be used to generalize the trust that has grown in the therapist, to other individuals (i.e., concurrent continuity). 16 In the third year of treatment with ST, the patient is typically triggered more often as he is going through resocialization. In this phase, he is being increasingly confronted with stressors outside of the institution, e.g., in his relationship with family members or when trying to start a romantic relationship. This phase opens up new issues for inquiry that did not occur inside of the clinic yet. ST thus makes the resocialization process more effective by teaching the patient to deal with situations when he is exposed to risk factors that got him into trouble in the past (i.e., teaching the patient more adaptive ways of coping and reducing the maladaptive Schema Modes that get triggered). By working with these situations, ST supports follow-up continuity by teaching the patient to reduce (the impact of) such risk factors and provides him with the means to further build up protective factors conceptualized as healthy Schema Modes. 2.7.2. Transfer, generalization, and durability of ST in other institutional contexts. There are many different components to the forensic system, e.g., prisons, inpatient clinics, and outpatient addiction treatment programs. Ideally, ST will be increasingly applied in this systemic context. One of the most significant contributions that forensic ST could have is that it can facilitate continuity of care. In general, ST has the potential to provide a linchpin function that combines a variety of forensic services to one another. Introducing a common sense of concepts used to deal with the problems encountered in forensic populations would provide greater coherence and continuity across context and settings. Such a shared language would enable (para)professionals across different settings to pick up treatment and/or supervision of forensic patients where treatment in a previous context left off, supporting a continuum of care. Already, many professionals who are currently being trained in forensic ST are working in ambulant settings. The spreading of this expertise allows patients to be treated according to the ST model in their aftercare. Another development that supports the multi-systemic implementation of forensic ST is the fact that it is increasingly being offered in prisons. E.g., ST has already been successfully implemented in a women’s prison population in Bern, Switzerland. Usually, therapists in these types of settings have experience in the general mental health system, yet have relatively little forensic training. Training therapists in the correctional system in forensic ST could enhance the effectiveness of their work by teaching them a framework that is directly linked to the problems they encounter with their patients on a 17 daily basis, and which provides them with interventions that have shown to be effective in dealing with such issues. Not only could ST provide therapists in the correctional system with a way of treating offenders, it could also be a promising approach for prison guards. Part of the reasoning behind this is that prison environments can include rather toxic interactions between inmates and staff. ST could help to detoxify these interactions by teaching guards to understand the behavior that inmates display in a more compassionate, nonjudgmental way, teaching guards alternative ways of intervening. In this way ST could create a more benign environment by changing the punitive and controlling approach that guards often times adopt reflexively. Not only would ST facilitate the fulfillment of basic human values in this manner, it might potentially lower the risk of institutional violence and recidivism at the time of release. Research supporting this notion shows that the social climate in a prison has an impact on the behavior of violent offenders (Cooke, 1992) and that correctional staffs’ interpersonal style (e.g., the use of pro-social modeling) has been related to a lowering in criminal recidivism (Trotter, 1996). Ideally, prisons will adopt ST programs that prepare prisoners to leave incarcerated settings. Such a re-entry model would not only involve ST during incarceration, but also the involvement of, e.g., parole and probation officers, as well as family members of the patient or prisoner by familiarizing them with the ST model. In fact, starting in April 2013, ST will be taught to a group of prison guards in “Penitentiaire Inrichting Veenhuizen”, the Netherlands. 2.8. The duration of ST and aftercare 2.8.1. Duration of ST. As was described in the Theoretical Manual we recommend ST for forensic patients with PDs to be delivered for three years, starting with a frequency of two times per week. Part of the justification for this duration comes from the changes we see in patients during different phases of ST. What we notice is that most of the patients enrolled in our study enter therapy while in the high risk category of the Historical, Clinical and Risk management schema (HCR-20, Douglas & Webster, 1999), and that most of them shift into the medium category over approximately the first 18 months of therapy. It is during this period of time that the ST therapist persistently focuses on modes that are in the way of developing a therapeutic relationship, such as the “Detached Protector Mode” (in which the patient uses emotional detachment to protect oneself from painful feelings and avoids getting close to 18 anyone; Bernstein et al., 2007), and tries to reach more vulnerable modes of the patient. In the second 1.5 years of the three year treatment, we see a further diminishment in patients’ risk levels. We also so see though, that this not a monotonic trend, yet that there are ups and downs in this attenuation in risk, which is reflected on patients’ scores on short term risk assessment instruments like the Short Term Assessment of Risk and Treatability (START; Webster, Martin, Brink, Nicholls, & Middleton, 2004; Webster, Martin, Brink, Nicholls, & Desmarais, 2009). After a period of being described by the ST therapist and other staff members as being cooperative, forensic patients receiving ST often times show some changes in their behavior when moving into the last part of their therapy in which the resocialization process takes place. That is, as patients are transitioning from the protective environment that the clinic has provided them with into the world outside of the institution, they encounter new challenges, like interacting with their family or a partner, getting back into the work field, the temptation of drugs, and being exposed to their criminal network. During this phase, patients are more easily triggered and may be increasingly involved in incidents as they try to deal with the exposure to these external risk factors. Such new encounters are considered to be very important in the ST treatment process, as they provide opportunities for the patient to practice the skills that he learned in ST, as well as to identify new triggers for his Schema Modes. As it is outside of the clinic where the patient eventually has to function, the use of these “practice” situations in ST are considered to be essential in relapse prevention, with the ST therapist guiding the patient in finding and practicing adaptive ways of dealing with environmental stressors. It is this last phase of ST that we feel is a big part of the justification for offering forensic PD patients a full three years of therapy. There is anecdotal evidence that the combination of ST-based group therapy offered in combination with individual ST can speed up treatment progress in forensic patients. The treatment for personality disordered offenders in Rampton Hospital (Rampton, United Kingdom) for example, treats patients with a combination of group and individual psychotherapy sessions (both ST based and provided once a week) for a duration of 18 months, with which good results have been reported. It could be that the success of this program is due to this treatment population suffering from less severe psychopathology. However, it could also be that the most important element in offender treatment is practicing and generalizing the skills that have been learnt in therapy in a the context in which the patient will be confronted with real life risk factors. A parrallel 19 can be drawn here to the field of addiction treatment, as research has shown outpatient (after)care for alcohol and/or drug using offenders not to be any less effective than the often times more controlled inpatient treatment programs (e.g., Burdon et al., 2007; Hser, Evans, Huang, & Anglin, 2004). It could thus be that when ST is provided in ambulant settings it proves to be equally effective within a shorter period of time. The effects of the duration and dosage of ST on treatment outcome, however, have not been systematically evaluated. Therefore, RCTs should ideally be set up that investigate the differential effectiveness of in- versus outpatient settings on ST’s effectiveness, as well as the influence of offering ST in an individual versus group based fashion. 2.8.2. Duration of aftercare. We cannot with certainty state how long forensic PD patients’ aftercare should go on for after release from a forensic psychiatric institution. The patient group that we are targeting with ST (see Theoretical Manual) have an increased risk to recidivate in comparison with those patients that do not have a PD (Hiscoke, Långström, Ottosson, & Grann, 2003; Yu, Geddes, & Fazel, 2012), and among these patients, especially those with an additional diagnosis of psychopathy are more likely to reoffend (Hemphill, Hare, & Wong, 1998). Literature suggests that the longer these types of forensic patients desist from crime, the more their risk levels attenuate, with risk reduction continuing particularly during the first three years following release (e.g., Grann, Langstrom, Tengstrom, & Kullgren , 1999). We could therefore imagine that these first three years following discharge would be critical ones to invest in helping the patient to keep his environment as stable as possible, offering continued monitoring and support. We believe it would be very beneficial for the ease with which patients’ transition from an institutionalized setting into outpatient care if this continued support would take the form of ambulant ST. If this would not be feasible, some other type of aftercare should warrant the monitoring of early signals, guiding the patient when he is exposed to risk factors that trigger inadequate coping strategies. Continued monitoring during the time after release should facilitate the availability of necessary resources in some way or another. As the risk levels of non-recidivating patients seems to gradually diminish over three years, it might logically be expected that aftercare is not as crucial for patients that reach a certain level of stability over this period, characterized by the presence of protective factors like functioning within a prosocial network and having a relationship with a person that does not suffer from major psychopathology or uses substances. 20 These notions are, however, somewhat speculative and need further empirical investigation, as can be achieved through our RCT on the effectiveness of forensic ST. 2.9. Roles of professionals in concurrent and follow-up continuity When implementing ST in forensic settings, an illustration from our RCT could function as an example of role division in the process of concurrent and follow-up continuity. For the implementation of ST in various clinics for our clinical trial, there are agreements that we made between the treatment coordinator (“hoofd behandeling”), the patient’s ST therapist, and his caseworker (who is usually one of the psychiatric nurses that takes the role of the patient’s daily coach). The treatment coordinator and psychiatric nurses are informed about the goals of ST in two different ways. First, in some clinics, we have given two-day ST trainings for treatment coordinators and psychiatric nurses in understanding the basics of ST. More specifically, this training for non-psychotherapists consists of a theoretical explanation of the Schema Mode model, practicing in identifying Schema Modes in real life situations, as well as practicing some basic ST interventions (such as limited reparenting, empathic confrontation, and limit settings). The emphasis in this two-day program lies on putting ST into practice in the situations that these staff members encounter with patients on a daily basis. Not only does this training provide other staff than the ST therapists with a clear sense of the goals of ST, it also provides the treatment team with a common language to discuss patients’ problems and progress. A second way in which staff is informed about ST is by having the ST therapist(s) providing ongoing consultation about patients with the treatment team. In the early phase of a patient’s treatment, the ST therapists makes a case conceptualization using instruments like the Schema Mode Inventory (Lobbestael, et al., 2010) in which a patient’s risk factors and problem behaviors are conceptualized in terms of Schema Modes. As described earlier on, this conceptualization is subsequently presented and explained to the treatment team. The treatment goals that have been implemented by the team are then translated in Schema Mode concepts by linking them to the case conceptualization, integrating ST in the overall aims of treatment. E.g., when the indication for treatment is patients’ anger regulation problems, the ST therapist might translate the goal of treatment in reducing the “Angry Child Mode” by teaching the patient to tolerate and handle situations that provoke anger. Every six months, the ST therapist comes back with such a Schema Mode conceptualization as a basis for 21 collaboratively refining a patient’s treatment goals with the treatment team. In addition, and depending on the forensic institution, the ST therapist might also act as a coach for the treatment team. That is, once every one or two weeks, the therapist meets with the treatment team for a coaching session in which psychiatric nurses have the opportunity to present different situations that they have encountered with patients. In order or deal with these situations in a more effective way, the ST therapist can e.g., use role playing exercises to practice the implementation of ST interventions. Over recent years, ST has increasingly been implemented in other types of therapy for forensic patients. For example, forensic art and drama therapists have been trained in the use of ST, providing ST through the form of these therapy modalities. The main reason for why the combination of individual ST with creative ST therapy is effective, it that creative therapy is an effective medium to reach emotional states in forensic patients with PDs, many of which are characterized by high levels of emotional detachment. In the case where a patient also receives either arts or drama ST, the therapist that gives him individual ST also coordinates efforts with the creative therapist(s). In Forensic Psychiatric Center (FPC) the Rooyse Wissel, ST has been successfully implemented in such a multimodal way, with patients receiving individual and creative ST therapy, as well as using schema mode language to talk with their “mentors” (Kersten & de Vis, 2012). At this moment, there have not been made any formal arrangements in transferring patients who receive ST in forensic inpatient settings to other organizations, beyond the transfer of information that normally takes place. For the future, it would be a good idea to create such arrangements; ideally, there should be communication between the inpatient facility and ambulant aftercare, in which the “Forensisch Psychiatrisch Toezicht (FPT)” could play an essential role. We believe transfer could be very much facilitated when both inpatient settings, as well as ambulant treatment contexts provide ST. 22 3. Intervention Integrity 3.1. Means and facilities necessary for the implementation of ST Materials that are needed to implement ST include recording material such as a video camera in order to enable therapists’ competency ratings (see below). The major financial costs associated with the implementation of forensic ST concern the costs for training of ST therapists, paying for on sight supervision of ST therapists, the costs of independent evaluations of practice therapy tapes by independent ST experts (see below), and making the time available for biweekly supervision of therapists. Some additional financial means might be necessary when the ST therapist takes the role of supervising a liaison between different members of the treatment team (e.g., functioning as a coach for psychiatric nurses, mentoring them in dealing with difficult interactions with patients using Schema Mode concepts). Based on our RCT on ST (see the Evaluation Manual), the estimated costs involved in the training and supervision of a ST therapists over a three-year course are approximately €5403,-. The full-time salary costs of a senior ST therapist, over and above the costs of a “treatment as usual” therapist (taking into account the recommended biweekly frequency of ST vs. the delivery of weekly therapy in TAU) is estimated at €14989,-. It has to be noted that a trained therapist can obviously see more than one patient, which would not change these financial estimates. The training and supervision costs are fixed, yet the salary costs are high-end estimates, as they are based on the salary of senior therapists. The actual costs of salary will depend on the years of experience that a therapist has, as well as on the institution where a therapist works. Over the past years we have had extensive experience in the implementation of forensic ST in the context of our RCT. Typically the costs of training and supervision have been paid by the clinic or have been shared between therapist and clinic. It is not unusual for therapists that go through training and education via the VGCT or other credentialing mechanisms like the “GZ-opleiding” to pay for at least part of their own educational costs in the context of their own professional development. Therefore, even in his time of budget cutting, a doubling has been witnessed in the amount of therapists wanting to participate in our training program over the past two years. Another indication that the costs for training do not have to form an impediment is the fact that ST training has been increasingly given to therapists in Dutch prisons, suggesting that the costs seem sustainable by various institutions. 23 3.2. Professional competencies required from the organization The professional competencies required to implement ST in forensic settings first and foremost include therapists to successfully complete our training program for ST and demonstrate sufficient levels of competence in practicing ST (see below, also for competencies for other members of the project team). 3.3. The organizational structure needed to implement ST The organizational structure that is necessary to imbed ST in requires the formation of a project group. In both inpatient and ambulant settings, such a project group should include a person who is responsible for the implementation of ST and who leads the project from a clinical point of view (i.e., who leads the diagnostic staff that is responsible for the diagnostic assessment of patients and the therapeutic staff members who deliver ST to the patients), like the head of therapy services. In addition, a practical manager is needed who is responsible for the practical requirements for implementation, such as making enough time and money available for this purpose. 3.4. Selection, training, and supervision of ST therapists 3.4.1. Training. ST is a complex form of psychotherapy, which requires extensive training to master. Since 2005, Bernstein and colleagues have established an annual training program in ST for professionals working with offenders, offered jointly by the Expertise Center for Forensic Psychiatry (EFP) and Dutch Cognitive Behavior Therapy Society (VGCT). The content and structure of the program are found in the Education Manual. 3.4.2. Selection and competence. Our training program is open to psychotherapists, clinical psychologists, psychiatrists, and other mental health professionals, including members of other allied psychological disciplines (e.g., music, drama, art, and movement therapists, socio-therapists). While some previous experience in doing psychotherapy or an allied form of therapy is desirable (i.e., at least 3 years of post-graduate therapy experience is recommended), we have found that therapists at earlier stages of their training can also learn ST, though they may need a longer supervision period in order to reach higher levels of mastery. A certain level of self-selection is also involved in who successfully completes the program and subsequently starts to treat patients as a ST therapist. That is, an essential part of ST 24 concerns the formation of an emotional bond with the patient. Therapists who are drawn to ST usually have the capacity to do so. If not, we have adopted procedures (see below) to assess the competency of therapists. In our experience, however, the majority of participating therapists are rated as being competent enough after finishing the course, only in some cases was it necessary to ask participants to follow additional training. The formal assessment of therapists’ competence includes having the therapist make a Schema Mode case conceptualization of a patient, and by demonstrating therapy skills (either by an in class demonstration or by providing videotaped material of a session with a patient). In order to successfully complete the training program, therapists must also demonstrate competence in delivering ST by providing own videotaped sessions. For the ST training, therapists select one or two patients who they practice ST with. After 6 to 9 months of training, the therapist turns in 4 tapes of consecutive, recent sessions. Therapists’ competency to provide ST is assessed by independent, experienced ST experts who rate 2 randomly selected videotapes of therapists’ sessions, using the Schema Therapy Rating Scale (STRS; Young, 2005). Therapists need to demonstrate competence in ST according to the standards of the International Society for Schema Therapy (www.isst-online.com), as indicated by an average score of 4 or higher across the STRS’s domains. If by the end of the training, therapists do not meet these standards, they are offered additional training. By the adoption of such strict competency standards for the successful completion of our program, we ensure a high quality of ST skills training. Moreover, when implementing forensic ST, we recommend that such competency ratings for therapists become standard practice, particularly in forensic settings in which the therapists’ competency may affect patients’ recidivism risk (Bernstein et al., 2007). 3.4.3. Supervision, support, and continuity. After the therapists finish training, supervision is essential for therapists in the early stages of their ST training. Many therapists working in forensic settings have difficulty getting started with ST, even after they have attended ST workshops, unless they have the support and guidance of regular supervision sessions. This is not surprising, given the challenges of learning ST and working with forensic patients with severe PDs. In our experience, regular supervision or peer supervision sessions are necessary to insure the effective delivery of ST in forensic settings, providing support and guidance for ST therapists. 25 ST has been widely implemented in the forensic system, including inpatient (TBS) clinics, ambulant settings, as well as in addiction treatment programs, with the majority of professionals delivering ST in these contexts having been trained by our program. When setting up an ST program in settings like these, we recommend to develop the same kind of supervision groups as those in the clinics that participate in our research. In these clinics, we created supervision groups in which no more than 5 or 6 therapists participate, and which are held every two weeks and last for two hours. A senior ST therapist is being brought in to guide these supervision meetings. During these supervision groups, a variety of potential difficulties in the treatment of forensic patients using ST are discussed, including the therapists’ stance towards patients, or other potential obstacles that could hinder the effective implementation of ST. In our RCT on the effectiveness of ST, we experienced that the replacement of therapists has only been necessary very occasionally. We believe that this regular supervision plays a significant role in coaching and guiding ST therapists in effectively delivering ST to their patients and maintaining a sense of self-efficacy in doing so. In several clinics, senior therapists have been hired and have been developing the competence for developing peer-supervision to other ST therapists from within the clinic (i.e., FPC the Rooyse Wissel, the Van der Hoeven Clinic, FPC Oostvaarders, and FPK Veldzicht). In order to facilitate this process, we have been organizing a “train-the-trainer” program, which takes places every one to two months and lasts for three hours. During these meetings, which take place in the Van der Hoeven Clinic in Utrecht, ST therapists from throughout the Netherlands are supervised and trained in developing the skills to become peersupervisors. 3.5. The monitoring of patients ST therapists are motivated to regularly assess patients’ progress using measures like the Schema Mode Inventory (SMI; Lobbestael et al., 2010). Prof. Bernstein and colleagues have developed a number of other additional assessment tools that can be used to measure ST concepts (e.g., Schema Modes) and treatment outcomes. The Mode Observation Scale (MOS; Bernstein, Arntz, & de Vos, 2009) is an observer-based rating scale for assessing Schema Modes in therapy sessions or other clinical settings (e.g., on inpatient wards). The MOS is a useful tool for training therapists to recognize Schema Modes—a key aspect of the ST approach—and to monitor changes in modes over time. The MOS’s manual provides detailed descriptions 26 of 18 different Schema Modes (Bernstein et al., 2010) and has shown good interrater reliability in studies in which patients’ therapy sessions have been rated by independent observers (e.g., van den Broek, Bernstein, & Keulen-de Vos, 2011). To assess changes in PD symptoms in forensic patients, Keulen-de Vos and colleagues (Keulen-de Vos, et al., 2011) created forensic versions of the widely used SNAP personality questionnaire. Because forensic patients often show response biases, such as a tendency to minimize or deny problems, a forensic informant-version of the SNAP was created, which is not dependent on patients’ self-reports, along with a self-report version. In an initial study (Keulen-de Vos et al., 2011), the forensic informant- and patient-versions of the SNAP showed good reliability and validity, with the informant version revealing more PD symptoms than the patient version. 3.6. Implementation and monitoring the quality of the implementation of ST For the implementation of ST, additional resources will have to be made available in order to train and supervise therapists. In addition, a project group will have to be formed in order to clinically and practically manage the implementation process (see above). After implementation, keeping track of the quality of the ST that is being delivered to patients can be accomplished using the Treatment Integrity Scale (TIS; Bernstein, de Vos, & van den Broek, 2009) that we developed to assess treatment integrity. The TIS is an observer-based rating scale to monitor adherence to ST therapy techniques. It consists of 7 subscales cover the entire range of ST techniques. The TIS has demonstrated good interrater reliability from videotaped ratings of therapy sessions (van den Broek et al., 2011). In the course of our RCT, we have thoroughly assessed the treatment integrity of ST delivered by the therapists trained through our program. In the context of a preliminary analysis of the treatment integrity of ST in our RCT, we randomly selected videotaped therapy sessions of 26 forensic patients, from an early (3 months), middle (18 months), and late (36 months) time point in the three years of therapy. Results showed ST and TAU sessions to differ significantly on all TIS subscales, during all three time points, suggesting that ST therapists were indeed using ST techniques, whereas TAU therapists were not (Bouts, 2012). These results provide support for the notion that our ST course is adequately training therapists to adhere to the ST model in delivering their therapy. We are currently in the process of repeating these analyses for the rest of the participating clinics, which we will be able to finish by the winter of 2014. The TIS is 27 available for other institutions that have implemented ST, enabling clinics to ensure sufficient levels of treatment adherence by their ST therapists. 28 References American Psychiatric Association (2000). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (4th ed., text rev.). Washington DC: Author. Bamelis, L., & Arntz, A. (2012, April). Schema therapy for personality disorders. Congress of the Dutch Society for Psychiatry, NVVP 2012, Maastricht, the Netherlands. Bernstein, D.P., Arntz, A., & de Vos, M.E. (2007). Schema-Focused Therapy in forensic settings: theoretical model and recommendations for best clinical practice. International Journal of Forensic Mental Health, 6(2), 169-183. Bernstein, D. P., de Vos, M., & van den Broek, E. (2008). Schema Therapy Integrity Scale. Unpublished manuscript. Bernstein, D. P., de Vos, M., & van den Broek, E. (2009). Mode Observation Scale and Manual. Unpublished manuscript. Bernstein, D. P., Keulen-de Vos, M., Jonkers, P., de Jonge, E., & Arntz, A. (2012). Schema Therapy in forensic settings (pp. 425-438). In van Vreeswijk, M. Broersen, J. & Nadort, M. (Eds.), The Wiley-Blackwell Handbook of Schema Therapy. Routledge. Bernstein, D. P., Nijman, H., Karos, K., Keulen-de Vos, M., de Vogel, V., & Lucker, T. (2012). Schema Therapy for forensic patients with personality disorders: Design and preliminary findings of multicenter randomized clinical trial in the Netherlands. International Journal of Forensic Mental Health, 11, 312-324. Bernstein, D. P., de Vos, M. E., & van den Broek, E. P. A. (2009). Therapy Integrity Scale (TIS). Unpublished manuscript. Bordin, E. (1979). The generalizability of the psychoanalytic concept of the working alliance. Psychotherapy: Theory, Research, and Practice, 16, 252–260. Burdon, W.M., Dang, J., Prendergast, M.L., Messina, N.P., & Farabee, D., (2007). Differential effectiveness of residential versus outpatient aftercare for parolees from prison-based therapeutic community treatment programs. Substance Abuse Treatment, Prevention, and Policy, 2, (16). Bouts, L. (2012). Therapy adherence of schema focused therapists. Unpublished thesis, Maastricht University, the Netherlands. Cooke, D.J. (1992) Violence in prisons: A Scottish perspective. Forum on Correctional Research, 4, 23-30. 29 Douglas, K.S., & Webster, C.D. (1999). The HCR-20 violence risk scheme: concurrent validity in a sample of incarcerated offenders. Criminal Justice and Behaviour, 26, 3-19. Douglas, K. S., & Reeves, K. A. (2010). Historical-Clinical-Risk management-20 (HCR-20) violence risk assessment scheme. Rationale, application, and empirical overview. In R.K. Otto & K.S. Douglas (Eds.), Handbook of violence risk assessment (pp. 147–185). New York, NY: Taylor & Francis. Drieschner, K. (2005). Measuring treatment motivation and treatment engagement in forensic psychiatric outpatient treatment: development of two instruments. Enschede, the Netherlands: Febodruk. Drieschner, K., Lammers, S., & van der Staak, D. (2004). Treatment motivation: an attempt for clarification of an ambiguous concept. Clinical Psychology Review, 23, 1115–1137. First, M. B., Spitzer, R. L., Gibbon, M., & Williams, J. B. (1997). Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV Axis I Disorders (SCID-I). New York, NY: New York State Psychiatric Institute. First, M. B, Spitzer, R. L, Gibbon, M., Williams, J. B., & Benjamin, L. (1994). Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV Axis II Personality Disorders (SCID-II). New York, NY: New York State Psychiatric Institute. Gibbon, S., Duggan, C., Stoffers, J., Huband, N., Völlm, B. A., Ferriter, M. & Lieb, K. (2010). Psychological interventions for antisocial personality disorder. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 16(6). CD007668. Giesen-Bloo, J., van Dyck, R., Spinhoven, P., van Tilburg, W., Dirksen, C., van Asselt, T., & Arntz, A. (2006). Outpatient psychotherapy for borderline personality disorder: Randomized trial of schema-focused therapy vs transference- focused psychotherapy. Archives of General Psychiatry, 63, 649–658. Grann, M., Langstrom, N., Tengstrom, A., & Kullgren, G. (1999). Psychopathy (PCLR) predicts violent recidivism among criminal offenders with personality disorders in Sweden. Law and Human Behavior, 23, 205 – 217. Hahn, S.R., Thompson, K.S., Wils, T.A., Stern, V., & Budner, N.S. (1994). The Difficult Doctor-Patient Relationship: Somatization, Personality and Psychopathology. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 47, 647-657. Hemphill, J., Hare, R., & Wong, S. (1998). Psychopathy and recidivism: A review. Legal Criminology Psychology, 3, 141-172. 30 Hiscoke, U.L., Långström, N., Ottosson, H., & Grann, M. (2003). Self-reported personality traits and disorders (DSM-IV) and risk of criminal recidivism: A prospective study. Journal of Personality Disorders, 17, 293-305. Horvath, A.O., & Greenberg, L.S. (1989). Development and Validation of the Working Alliance Inventory. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 36(2), 223-233. Horvath, A. O., & Symonds, B. D. (1991). Relation between working alliance and outcome in psychotherapy: A meta-analysis. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 38, 139-149. Hser, Y.I., Evans, E., Huang, D., & Anglin, D.M. (2004). Relationship between drug treatment services, retention, and outcomes. Psychiatric services, 55, 767-764. Jamieson, L., & Taylor, P. (2004). A re-conviction study of special (high security) hospital patients. British Journal of Criminology, 44, 783-802 Jeyakumar, S. L. E., Warriner, E. M., Raval, V. V., & Ahmad, S. A. (2004). Balancing the need for reliability and time efficiency: Short forms of the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-III. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 64, 71-87. Kennealy, P.J., Skeem., J.L., Manchak, S.M., & Eno Louden, J. (2012). Firm, fair, and caring officer-offender relationships protect against supervision failure. Law and Human Behavior, 36, 496-505. Kersten, T., & van de Vis, L. (2012). Implementation of Schema Therapy in De Rooyse Wissel Forensic Psychiatric Center. In M. van Vreeswijk, J. Broersen, & M. Nadort (Eds.), The Wiley-Blackwell handbook of Schema Therapy: theory, research, and practice. West Sussex, UK: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Keulen-de Vos, M.E., Bernstein, D.P., Clark, L.A., Arntz, A., Lucker, T., & de Spa, E. (2011). Patient versus informant reports of personality disorders in forensic patients. Journal of Forensic Psychiatry and Psychology, 22(1), 52-71. Lobbestael, J., Leurgans, M., & Arntz, A. (2011). Interrater reliability of the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV Axis I Disorders (SCID I) and Axis II Disorders (SCID II). Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, 18, 75–79. Lobbestael, J., van Vreeswijk, M., Spinhoven, P., Schouten, E., & Arntz. A. (2010) Reliability and validity of the Short Schema Mode Inventory (SMI). Behavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapy, 38, 437-458. Miller, S., Brown, J., & Sees, C. (2004). A preliminary study identifying risk factors in drop-out from a prison therapeutic community. Journal of clinical Forensic Medicine. 11, 189-197. 31 Miller, W. R., & Rollnick, S. (1991). Motivational interviewing: Preparing people for change. New York: Guilford Press. Nentjes, L., Bernstein, D.P., Arntz, A., van Breukelen, G.J.P., & Slaats, M.E. (2013). Examining the influence of psychopathy, hostility biases, and automatic processing on criminal offenders' Theory of Mind. Manuscript submitted for publication. Nicholls, T.L., Brink, J., Desmarais, S.L., Webster, C.D., & Martin, M-L. (2006). The Short-Term Assessment of Risk and Treatability (START): A prospective validation study in a forensic sample. Assessment, 13, 313-327. Pfohl, B., Blum, N., & Zimmerman, M. (1995). Structured interview for DSM-IV personality: SIDP-IV. Iowa City: University of Iowa College of Medicine. Putkonen, H., Komulainen, E., Virkkunen, M., Eronen, M., & Lonnqvist, J. (2003). American Journal of Psychiatry, 160, 947-951. Rosenfeld, B. (2003). Recidivism in stalking and obsessional harassment. Law and Human Behaviour, 27, 251-265. Røysamb, E., Kendler, K. S., Tambs, K., Ørstavik, R. E., Neale, M. C., Aggen, S. H., & Torgersen, S. R. (2011). The joint structure of DSM-IV Axis I and Axis II disorders. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 120, 198-209. Salekin, R., Rogers, R., & Sewell, K. (1996). A review and meta-analysis of the Psychopathy Checklist and Psychopathy Checklist-Revised: Predictive validity of dangerousness. Clinical Psychology, 3, 203-215. Spinhoven, P., Giesen-Bloo, J., van Dyck, R., Kooiman, K., & Arntz, A. (2007). The therapeutic alliance in schema-focused therapy and transference-focused psychotherapy for borderline personality disorder. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 75, 104-115. Taft, C.T., Murphy, C. M., Musser, P. H., & Remington, N. A. (2004). Personality, interpersonal, and motivational predictors of the working alliance in group cognitive-behavioral therapy for partner violent men. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 72, 349-54. Trotter, C. (1996) The impact of different supervision practices in community corrections: Cause for optimism. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Criminology, 29, 29-47. 32 Van den Broek, E.P.A., Keulen-de Vos, M.E., & Bernstein, D.P. (2011). Arts Therapies and Schema Focused Therapy; a pilot study. The Arts in Psychotherapy, 38, 325-332. Webster, C.D., Martin, M., Brink, J., Nicholls, T.L., & Middleton, C. (2004). Short-term assessment of risk and treatability (START). St. Josephs Healthcare, Hamilton and British Columbia Mental Health and Addiction Services. Webster, C.D., Martin, M., Brink, J., Nicholls, T.L., & Desmarais, S.L. (2009). Short-Term Assessment of Risk and Treatability (START). Clinical guide for evaluation risk and recovery (version 1.1). Ontario, Canada: St. Joseph’s Healthcare Hamilton Wechsler, D. (1997). WAIS-III, Nederlandstalige bewerking, technische handleiding. [WAIS-III, Dutch version manual]. Lisse (NL): Swets Test. Willis, G.M., & Grace, R.C. (2008). The quality of community reintegration planning for child molesters: Effects on sexual recidivism. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 20, 218-240. Young, J. E. (2005). Schema Therapy Rating Scale, retrievable from www.schematherapy.com Yu, R., Geddes, J. R., & Fazel, S. (2012). Personality disorders, violence, and antisocial behavior: A systematic review and meta-regression analysis. Journal of Personality Disorders, 26, 775-792. Zanarini, M. C., Skodol, A. E., Bender, D., Dolan, R. Sanislow, C., Schaefer, E, et al. (2000). The collaborative longitudinal personality disorders study: reliability of axis I and II diagnoses. Journal of Personality Disorders, 14, 291-299. 33
© Copyright 2024