Hypothesis: Personality Disorder (PD) adolescents, compared to non-PD case, have a worse experience at transition.

Aims: To describe the outcomes of referrals of adolescents for transition to adult services and compare PD and non-PD populations to identify potential improvements to allow for better transition experience of the PD patients.

Borderline PD is prevalent in adolescents - although there is a reluctance to make the diagnosis. When patients reach graduation from CAMHS, many fall through the ‘gap’ in services during the transition. Consequently, adding the paucity in research about the transition experience of PD patients, it is important to evaluate what happens to these patients during the transition process to help better understand their experience, and how it can be improved.

Patient's clinical records from Tower Hamlet CAMHS, East London NHS Foundation Trust, were reviewed retrospectively from July 2018 to November 2019, assessing whether optimal transition standards were met. A total of 41 cases that transitioned from CAMHS to AMHS were identified. Transition standards compared were: information sharing – case and risk, parallel care, transition planning and continuity. PD diagnosis was identified based on the recording of this diagnosis or meeting DSM5 criteria from the notes. PD and non-PD transition experience was compared.

36 were given a diagnosis by the CAMHS clinician at transition and 5 had no diagnosis assigned. No cases had a PD diagnosis made by the CAMHS clinician, however 1 case mentioned ‘PD traits’, 1 mentioned ‘EUPD’ as a possible differential and 2 cases were labelled as ‘emotional dysregulation’. The research team found 17 cases that met DSM5 criteria for PD diagnosis.

Comparing transition experience of PD vs non-PD patients, the PD patients had a less optimal transition process. Statistical analysis using Chi Square Tests, showed significantly less optimal transition planning (X2 = 5.103, p < 0.05) and continuity (Fisher's exact test p = 0.049). Cohens W indicated a medium effect for transition planning and continuity.

Adolescents with a diagnosis of PD transition less well to Adult MHS than those without the PD diagnosis. Implications of our findings point to 1) the importance of considering a diagnosis of PD 2) if the diagnosis of PD is made, to anticipate greater difficulties in transition 3) the need to identify specific reasons for transition difficulties related to patient, clinician and system factors and their interrelation.

Personality disorders are now internationally recognised as a mental health priority. Nevertheless, there are no systematic reviews examining the global prevalence of personality disorders.

To calculate the worldwide prevalence of personality disorders and examine whether rates vary between high-income countries and low- and middle-income countries (LMICs).

We systematically searched PsycINFO, MEDLINE, EMBASE and PubMed from January 1980 to May 2018 to identify articles reporting personality disorder prevalence rates in community populations (PROSPERO registration number: CRD42017065094).

A total of 46 studies (from 21 different countries spanning 6 continents) satisfied inclusion criteria. The worldwide pooled prevalence of any personality disorder was 7.8% (95% CI 6.1–9.5). Rates were greater in high-income countries (9.6%, 95% CI 7.9–11.3%) compared with LMICs (4.3%, 95% CI 2.6–6.1%). In univariate meta-regressions, significant heterogeneity was partly attributable to study design (two-stage v. one-stage assessment), county income (high-income countries v. LMICs) and interview administration (clinician v. trained graduate). In multiple meta-regression analysis, study design remained a significant predictor of heterogeneity. Global rates of cluster A, B and C personality disorders were 3.8% (95% CI 3.2, 4.4%), 2.8% (1.6, 3.7%) and 5.0% (4.2, 5.9%).

Personality disorders are prevalent globally. Nevertheless, pooled prevalence rates should be interpreted with caution due to high levels of heterogeneity. More large-scale studies with standardised methodologies are now needed to increase our understanding of population needs and regional variations.

No accepted intervention exists for borderline personality disorder presenting in adolescence.

To compare the effectiveness of up to 24 sessions of cognitive analytic therapy (CAT) or manualised good clinical care (GCC) in addition to a comprehensive service model of care.

In a randomised controlled trial, CAT and GCC were compared in out-patients aged 15–18 years who fulfilled two to nine of the DSM–IV criteria for borderline personality disorder. We predicted that, compared with the GCC group, the CAT group would show greater reductions in psychopathology and parasuicidal behaviour and greater improvement in global functioning over 24 months.

Eighty-six patients were randomised and 78 (CAT n=41; GCC n=37) provided follow-up data. There was no significant difference between the outcomes of the treatment groups at 24 months on the pre-chosen measures but there was some evidence that patients allocated to CAT improved more rapidly. No adverse effect was shown with either treatment.

Both CAT and GCC are effective in reducing externalising psychopathology in teenagers with sub-syndromal or full-syndrome bipolar personality disorder. Larger studies are required to determine the specific value of CAT in this population.