scholarly journals Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD)

Psychology ◽  
2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chris R. Brewin

Severe reactions to experiences such as combat and railway accidents have been described since the mid-19th century by numerous physicians, including Sigmund Freud and Pierre Janet. These descriptions include two types of characteristic symptoms: dissociative symptoms, in which there is a general disturbance in normal mental functions, such as memory, consciousness, time estimation, sense of reality, and identity, and reexperiencing symptoms, in which the traumatic event is vividly relived as though it were happening all over again in the present. Despite this early recognition, posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) was formally defined only in the third edition of the American Psychiatric Association’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders: DSM-III (Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association, 1980). Prior to this, exposure to stress was assumed to produce only short-term problems in adjustment. In the DSM-III, PTSD required exposure to “a recognizable stressor that would evoke significant symptoms of distress in almost everyone” (p. 238) and was “outside the range of normal human experience” (p. 236). In addition four symptoms had to be present reflecting reexperiencing of the traumatic event, numbing and detachment, and a more pervasive change in arousal or emotions. The introduction of the disorder in the DSM-III was strongly influenced by studies of combat veterans and women in violent relationships, which suggested the existence of more long-lasting psychiatric conditions, variously termed “combat neurosis,” “rape trauma syndrome,” or “battered women syndrome.” The PTSD diagnosis was designed to subsume these syndromes and capture what was considered to be an essentially normal response to any overwhelming trauma. This made it unlike other psychiatric disorders, which all implied some vulnerability on the part of the person who succumbed to it. The definition was refined in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders: DSM-III-R published in 1987, which introduced more symptoms and required at least one reexperiencing symptom (e.g., intrusive memories or nightmares), three avoidance or numbing symptoms (e.g., avoidance of reminders of the traumatic event or loss of interest in activities), and two hyperarousal symptoms (e.g., exaggerated startle or irritability). Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders: DSM-IV, introduced in 1994, retained a similar structure. The 2013 Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders: DSM-5 increased the number of symptoms from seventeen to twenty and reorganized them into four symptom clusters, reexperiencing, avoidance, negative alterations in cognition and mood, and alterations in arousal and reactivity. In 1992 PTSD also appeared in another major international classification system, the tenth edition of the World Health Organization’s International Classification of Diseases (ICD-10) (Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization, 1992–1994). This formulation placed more emphasis on “episodes of repeated reliving of the trauma in intrusive memories (‘flashbacks’) or dreams” and also identified avoidance, numbing, and hyperarousal as central features. International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11) (Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization, 2019) greatly simplified the PTSD diagnosis, requiring one out of two reexperiencing symptoms, one out of two avoidance symptoms, and one out of two sense of threat symptoms, along with impairment in functioning.

1991 ◽  
Vol 159 (S14) ◽  
pp. 46-51 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew Sims

The psychiatric section, entitled ‘Mental, Behavioural and Developmental Disorders‘ of the International Classification of Diseases, is currently in the process of revision, and ‘ICD—10‘ will shortly become available. This revision will be based partly on its immediate predecessor, the 9th Revision of the International Classification of Diseases (ICD—9; World Health Organization, 1978), and also upon the American Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM—III—R; American Psychiatric Association, 1987). ICD—10 describes and lists symptoms required for making each specific diagnosis and it also refers to inclusions and exclusions. The symptoms themselves, however, are not defined nor described, and an ill-informed method of evaluating symptoms or a lack of thoroughness in their ascertainment will result in mistaken diagnoses. The descriptive psychopathologist clearly has a part to play in encouraging accurate usage.


Author(s):  
Timo D. Vloet ◽  
Marcel Romanos

Zusammenfassung. Hintergrund: Nach 12 Jahren Entwicklung wird die 11. Version der International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11) von der Weltgesundheitsorganisation (WHO) im Januar 2022 in Kraft treten. Methodik: Im Rahmen eines selektiven Übersichtsartikels werden die Veränderungen im Hinblick auf die Klassifikation von Angststörungen von der ICD-10 zur ICD-11 zusammenfassend dargestellt. Ergebnis: Die diagnostischen Kriterien der generalisierten Angststörung, Agoraphobie und spezifischen Phobien werden angepasst. Die ICD-11 wird auf Basis einer Lebenszeitachse neu organisiert, sodass die kindesaltersspezifischen Kategorien der ICD-10 aufgelöst werden. Die Trennungsangststörung und der selektive Mutismus werden damit den „regulären“ Angststörungen zugeordnet und können zukünftig auch im Erwachsenenalter diagnostiziert werden. Neu ist ebenso, dass verschiedene Symptomdimensionen der Angst ohne kategoriale Diagnose verschlüsselt werden können. Diskussion: Die Veränderungen im Bereich der Angsterkrankungen umfassen verschiedene Aspekte und sind in der Gesamtschau nicht unerheblich. Positiv zu bewerten ist die Einführung einer Lebenszeitachse und Parallelisierung mit dem Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5). Schlussfolgerungen: Die entwicklungsbezogene Neuorganisation in der ICD-11 wird auch eine verstärkte längsschnittliche Betrachtung von Angststörungen in der Klinik sowie Forschung zur Folge haben. Damit rückt insbesondere die Präventionsforschung weiter in den Fokus.


2017 ◽  
Vol 52 (5) ◽  
pp. 425-434 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bo Bach ◽  
Martin Sellbom ◽  
Mathias Skjernov ◽  
Erik Simonsen

Objective: The five personality disorder trait domains in the proposed International Classification of Diseases, 11th edition and the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th edition are comparable in terms of Negative Affectivity, Detachment, Antagonism/Dissociality and Disinhibition. However, the International Classification of Diseases, 11th edition model includes a separate domain of Anankastia, whereas the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th edition model includes an additional domain of Psychoticism. This study examined associations of International Classification of Diseases, 11th edition and Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th edition trait domains, simultaneously, with categorical personality disorders. Method: Psychiatric outpatients ( N = 226) were administered the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV Axis II Personality Disorders Interview and the Personality Inventory for DSM-5. International Classification of Diseases, 11th edition and Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th edition trait domain scores were obtained using pertinent scoring algorithms for the Personality Inventory for DSM-5. Associations between categorical personality disorders and trait domains were examined using correlation and multiple regression analyses. Results: Both the International Classification of Diseases, 11th edition and the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th edition domain models showed relevant continuity with categorical personality disorders and captured a substantial amount of their information. As expected, the International Classification of Diseases, 11th edition model was superior in capturing obsessive–compulsive personality disorder, whereas the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th edition model was superior in capturing schizotypal personality disorder. Conclusion: These preliminary findings suggest that little information is ‘lost’ in a transition to trait domain models and potentially adds to narrowing the gap between Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th edition and the proposed International Classification of Diseases, 11th edition model. Accordingly, the International Classification of Diseases, 11th edition and Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th edition domain models may be used to delineate one another as well as features of familiar categorical personality disorder types. A preliminary category-to-domain ‘cross walk’ is provided in the article.


2015 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
pp. 6-7

The recent publication of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders 5.1 by the American Psychiatric Association, and the continuing work of the World Health Organization on the 11th revision of the International Classification of Diseases raises once more the question of the need for, the use, and the usefulness of diagnosis in psychiatry The fact that, despite significant advances of science, we are still uncertain about the causes and pathogenesis of mental disorders seems to support the notion that it would be better to use syndromes instead of diagnoses, or go even further and describe mental states in health and disease by a series of ratings on key dimensions of mental functioning. Another option that has also received some backing is the presentation of the universe of mental illness by a series of disease prototypes which, it is argued, would be particularly attractive to practising clinicians. The paper discusses these issues and ends by supporting the use of different ways of presenting mental illness, depending on the purpose of the description.


1994 ◽  
Vol 6 (4) ◽  
pp. 66-68
Author(s):  
M.J.A.J.M. Hoes

Gedurende de laatste jaren zijn nieuwe edities van twee grote classificatiesystemen uitgebracht. De American Psychiatric Association heeft in 1994 de vierde editie van de Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-IV) gepubliceerd en de Wereldgezondheids-organisatie in 1991 de tiende editie van de International Classification of Diseases (ICD-10). Van de laatste is hier het vijfde hoofdstuk (V of F) over psychische stoornissen van belang.Vergeleken met de DSM-III (-R) uit 1980 (1987) is de DSM-IV qua structuur niet veranderd. Vergeleken met de DSM-III-R zijn er wel quantitatieve verschillen: 105 veranderde categorieën op as-I, 3 veranderde op as-II, 9 nieuwe voorstellen voor klinische aandacht, 13 nieuwe diagnoses, terwijl 8 classificaties verwijderd zijn en as-IV anders is gestructureerd, naar type belasting in plaats van ernst van belastende factoren.


2020 ◽  
Vol 54 (11) ◽  
pp. 1095-1100
Author(s):  
Roger T Mulder ◽  
L John Horwood ◽  
Peter Tyrer

Objective: The International Classification of Diseases, 11th Revision classification of personality disorder removes all categories of disorder in favour of a single diagnostic spectrum extending from no personality dysfunction to severe personality disorder. Following concerns from some clinicians and Personality Disorder Societies, it was subsequently agreed to include a borderline pattern descriptor as a qualifier of the main diagnosis. We explore the value of this additional descriptor by examining personality data in patients with major depression. Method: We examined personality data obtained using the Structured Clinical Interview for Personality Disorder-II in 606 patients enrolled in five randomised controlled trials of depression. The Structured Clinical Interview for Personality Disorder-II uses the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders categorical system, which includes borderline personality disorder. The International Classification of Diseases, 11th Revision classification has five domain traits. Each of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders personality disorder symptoms or behaviours from Structured Clinical Interview for Personality Disorder-II was reordered into the five domains independently by two assessors. The relationship between the two systems was examined by tabular and correlational analysis. Results: The findings showed that the symptoms of borderline personality disorder were associated with greater severity of personality disturbance in the International Classification of Diseases, 11th Revision classification ( p < 0.0001) and were associated primarily with the Negative Affective, Dissocial and Disinhibited domains. There was only a weak association with the other two domains, Anankastia and Detachment. Conclusion: The addition of a borderline pattern descriptor is likely to add little to the International Classification of Diseases, 11th Revision classification of personality disorder. Its features are well represented within the severity/domain structure, which allows for more fine-grained description of the personality features that constitute the borderline concept.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document