Mental illness is known to come along with a large mortality gap compared to thegeneral population and it is a risk for COVID-19 related morbidity andmortality. Achieving high vaccination rates in people with mental illness is therefore important. Reports are conflicting on whether vaccination rates comparable to those of the general population can be achieved and which variables represent risk factors for nonvaccination in people with mental illness.

The COVID Ψ Vac study collected routine data on vaccination status, diagnostic groups, sociodemographics, and setting characteristics from in- and day-clinic patients of 10 psychiatric hospitals in Germany in August 2021. Logistic regression modeling was used to determine risk factors for nonvaccination.

Complete vaccination rates were 59% (n = 776) for the hospitalized patients with mental illness versus 64% for the regionally and age-matched general population. Partial vaccination rates were 68% (n = 893) for the hospitalised patients with mental illness versus 67% for the respective general population and six percentage (n = 74) of this hospitalized population were vaccinated during the hospital stay. Rates showed a large variation between hospital sites. An ICD-10 group F1, F2, or F4 main diagnosis, younger age, and coercive accommodation were further risk factors for nonvaccination in the model.

Vaccination rates were lower in hospitalized people with mental illness than in the general population. By targeting at-risk groups with low-threshold vaccination programs in all health institutions they get in contact with, vaccination rates comparable to those in the general population can be achieved.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic might affect mental health. Data from population-representative panel surveys with multiple waves including pre-COVID data investigating risk and protective factors are still rare.

In a stratified random sample of the German household population (n = 6684), we conducted survey-weighted multiple linear regressions to determine the association of various psychological risk and protective factors assessed between 2015 and 2020 with changes in psychological distress [(PD; measured via Patient Health Questionnaire for Depression and Anxiety (PHQ-4)] from pre-pandemic (average of 2016 and 2019) to peri-pandemic (both 2020 and 2021) time points. Control analyses on PD change between two pre-pandemic time points (2016 and 2019) were conducted. Regularized regressions were computed to inform on which factors were statistically most influential in the multicollinear setting.

PHQ-4 scores in 2020 (M = 2.45) and 2021 (M = 2.21) were elevated compared to 2019 (M = 1.79). Several risk factors (catastrophizing, neuroticism, and asking for instrumental support) and protective factors (perceived stress recovery, positive reappraisal, and optimism) were identified for the peri-pandemic outcomes. Control analyses revealed that in pre-pandemic times, neuroticism and optimism were predominantly related to PD changes. Regularized regression mostly confirmed the results and highlighted perceived stress recovery as most consistent influential protective factor across peri-pandemic outcomes.

We identified several psychological risk and protective factors related to PD outcomes during the COVID-19 pandemic. A comparison of pre-pandemic data stresses the relevance of longitudinal assessments to potentially reconcile contradictory findings. Implications and suggestions for targeted prevention and intervention programs during highly stressful times such as pandemics are discussed.

A recently updated Cochrane review supports the efficacy of psychotherapy for borderline personality disorder (BPD).

To evaluate the effects of standalone and add-on psychotherapeutic treatments more concisely.

We applied the same methods as the 2020 Cochrane review, but focused on adult samples and comparisons of active treatments and unspecific control conditions. Standalone treatments (i.e. necessarily including individual psychotherapy as either the sole or one of several treatment components) and add-on interventions (i.e. complementing any ongoing individual BPD treatment) were analysed separately. Primary outcomes were BPD severity, self-harm, suicide-related outcomes and psychosocial functioning. Secondary outcomes were remaining BPD diagnostic criteria, depression and attrition.

Thirty-one randomised controlled trials totalling 1870 participants were identified. Among standalone treatments, statistically significant effects of low overall certainty were observed for dialectical behaviour therapy (self-harm: standardised mean difference (SMD) −0.54, P = 0.006; psychosocial functioning: SMD −0.51, P = 0.01) and mentalisation-based treatment (self-harm: risk ratio 0.51, P < 0.0007; suicide-related outcomes: risk ratio 0.10, P < 0.0001). For adjunctive interventions, moderate-quality evidence of beneficial effects was observed for DBT skills training (BPD severity: SMD −0.66, P = 0.002; psychosocial functioning: SMD −0.45, P = 0.002), and statistically significant low-certainty evidence was observed for the emotion regulation group (BPD severity: mean difference −8.49, P < 0.00001), manual-assisted cognitive therapy (self-harm: mean difference −3.03, P = 0.03; suicide-related outcomes: SMD −0.96, P = 0.005) and the systems training for emotional predictability and problem-solving (BPD severity: SMD −0.48, P = 0.002).

There is reasonable evidence to conclude that psychotherapeutic interventions are helpful for individuals with BPD. Replication studies are needed to enhance the certainty of findings.

Treatment with low-dose interferon alpha (IFN-α) is often associated with neuropsychiatric side effects. In addition to depression and anxiety, IFN-α associated cognitive impairment significantly affects patient’s mental health and quality of life.

To measure possible effects of low-dose IFN-α on cognitive functioning and its relationship to the development of depression and anxiety.

We prospectively followed 38 patients with a chronic hepatitis B or C by neuropsychological tests and psychiatric self-rating scales during 12 weeks of low-dose treatment with IFN-α.

Before IFN-α treatment, neuropsychological tests as well as self-ratings in the Beck’s Depression Inventory (BDI), the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) and the Self-Report Symptom Inventory 90 Items-Revised (SCL-90-R) were within the normal range. Following 12 weeks of treatment with IFN-α resulted in a slight, but significant increase in depression scores. Neuropsychological assessment after 12 weeks of IFN-α treatment showed a significant decrease of the immediate recall in the Auditory-Verbal Learning Test (AVLT) and a significant reduction of words recited in the Controlled Oral Word Association Test (COWA). Cognitive impairment did not significantly correlate with depressive symptoms or anxiety.

Our results indicate that even low-dose IFN-α induces cognitive impairment independent from depressive symptoms, which might be related to functional disturbances in the prefrontal cortex and the hippocampus. We suggest close monitoring of cognitive function during IFN-α treatment of chronic hepatitis.

Many patients with borderline personality disorder receive pharmacological treatment, but there is uncertainty about the usefulness of such therapies.

To evaluate the evidence of effectiveness of pharmacotherapy in treating different facets of the psychopathology of borderline personality disorder.

A Cochrane Collaboration systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised comparisons of drug v. placebo, drug v. drug, or single drug v. combined drug treatment in adult patients with borderline personality disorder was conducted. Primary outcomes were overall disorder severity as well as specific core symptoms. Secondary outcomes comprised associated psychiatric pathology and drug tolerability.

Twenty-seven trials were included in which first- and second-generation antipsychotics, mood stabilisers, antidepressants and omega-3 fatty acids were tested. Most beneficial effects were found for the mood stabilisers topiramate, lamotrigine and valproate semisodium, and the second-generation antipsychotics aripiprazole and olanzapine. However, the robustness of findings is low, since they are based mostly on single, small studies. Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors so far lack high-level evidence of effectiveness.

The current evidence from randomised controlled trials suggests that drug treatment, especially with mood stabilisers and second-generation antipsychotics, may be effective for treating a number of core symptoms and associated psychopathology, but the evidence does not currently support effectiveness for overall severity of borderline personality disorder. Pharmacotherapy should therefore be targeted at specific symptoms.

Clinical experience suggests that people with borderline personality disorder often meet criteria for attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). However, empirical data are sparse.

To establish the prevalence of childhood and adult ADHD in a group of women with borderline personality disorder and to investigate the psychopathology and childhood experiences of those with and without ADHD.

We assessed women seeking treatment for borderline personality disorder (n=118) for childhood and adult ADHD, co-occurring Axis I and Axis II disorders, severity of borderline symptomatology and traumatic childhood experiences.

Childhood (41.5%) and adult (16.1%) ADHD prevalence was high. Childhood ADHD was associated with emotional abuse in childhood and greater severity of adult borderline symptoms. Adult ADHD was associated with greater risk for co-occurring Axis I and II disorders.

Adults with severe borderline personality disorder frequently show a history of childhood ADHD symptomatology. Persisting ADHD correlates with frequency of co-occurring Axis I and II disorders. Severity of borderline symptomatology in adulthood is associated with emotional abuse in childhood. Further studies are needed to differentiate any potential causal relationship between ADHD and borderline personality disorder.