Interdiagnostician Reliability of the DSM-5 Section II and Section III Alternative Model Criteria for Borderline Personality Disorder

2019 ◽  
Vol 33 (6) ◽  
pp. 721-S18 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leslie C. Morey

This study examined the interdiagnostician reliability and potential gender bias of the DSM-IV/DSM-5 Section II and DSM-5 Alternative Model definitions of borderline personality disorder. A national sample of 123 mental health professionals provided diagnostic judgments on 12 case vignettes selected to represent a range of personality pathology. Two versions of each case were included, one identified as male and the other as female, but which were otherwise identical. Analyses examined the intraclass correlation between clinicians and also examined rates of diagnostic assignments as a function of case gender. Reliability of diagnosis of borderline personality did not differ across the two diagnostic approaches, and concordance of diagnoses across the two systems was significant. The dimensional components of the DSM-5 Alternative Model demonstrated significantly more diagnostic reliability than the DSM-IV categorical diagnoses. The DSM-5 Alternative Model conceptualization of borderline personality can be diagnosed with comparable or greater reliability than the extant DSM-IV definition.

2016 ◽  
Vol 37 ◽  
pp. 22-27 ◽  
Author(s):  
B. Bach ◽  
M. Sellbom ◽  
S. Bo ◽  
E. Simonsen

AbstractObjectiveBorderline Personality Disorder (BPD) is a highly prevalent diagnosis in mental health care and includes a heterogeneous constellation of symptoms. As the field of personality disorder (PD) research moves to emphasize dimensional traits in its operationalization, it is important to determine how the alternative DSM-5 Section III personality trait dimensions differentiates such features in BPD patients versus comparison groups. To date, no study has attempted such validation.MethodThe current study examined the utility of the DSM-5 trait dimensions in differentiating patients with the categorical DSM-IV/5 diagnosis of BPD (n = 101) from systematically matched samples of other PD patients (n = 101) and healthy controls (n = 101). This was investigated using one-way ANOVA and multinomial logistic regression analyses.ResultsResults indicated that Emotional Lability, Risk Taking, and Suspiciousness uniquely differentiated BPD patients from other PD patients, whereas Emotional Lability, Depressivity, and Suspiciousness uniquely differentiated BPD patients from healthy controls.ConclusionEmotional Lability is in particular a key BPD feature of the proposed Section III model, whereas Suspiciousness also augments essential BPD features. Provided that these findings are replicated cross-culturally in forthcoming research, a more parsimonious traits operationalization of BPD features is warranted.


2012 ◽  
Vol 121 (4) ◽  
pp. 944-950 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joshua D. Miller ◽  
Jennifer Q. Morse ◽  
Kimberly Nolf ◽  
Stephanie D. Stepp ◽  
Paul A. Pilkonis

2017 ◽  
Vol 33 (2) ◽  
pp. 123-128 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anne van Alebeek ◽  
Paul T. van der Heijden ◽  
Christel Hessels ◽  
Melissa S.Y. Thong ◽  
Marcel van Aken

Abstract. One of the most common personality disorders among adolescents and young adults is the Borderline Personality Disorder (BPD). The objective of current study was to assess three questionnaires that can reliably screen for BPD in adolescents and young adults (N = 53): the McLean Screening Instrument for BPD (MSI-BPD; Zanarini et al., 2003 ), the Personality Diagnostic Questionnaire 4th edition – BPD scale (PDQ-4 BPD; Hyler, 1994 ), and the SCID-II Patient Questionnaire – BPD scale (SCID-II-PQ BPD). The nine criteria of BPD according to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders-IV (DSM-IV; APA, 1994 ) were measured with the Structural Clinical Interview for DSM-IV Axis II disorders – BPD scale (SCID-II; First, Spitzer, Gibbon, Williams, & Benjamin, 1995 ). Correlations between the questionnaires and the SCID-II were calculated. In addition, the sensitivity and specificity of the questionnaires were tested. All instruments predicted the BPD diagnosis equally well.


2011 ◽  
Vol 2011 ◽  
pp. 1-7 ◽  
Author(s):  
Silvio Bellino ◽  
Paola Bozzatello ◽  
Camilla Rinaldi ◽  
Filippo Bogetto

Antipsychotics are recommended for the treatment of impulsive dyscontrol and cognitive perceptual symptoms of borderline personality disorder (BPD). Three reports supported the efficacy of oral risperidone on BPD psychopathology. Paliperidone ER is the metabolite of risperidone with a similar mechanism of action, and its osmotic release reduces plasmatic fluctuations and antidopaminergic effects. The aim of this study is to evaluate efficacy and safety of paliperidone ER in BPD patients. 18 outpatients with a DSM-IV-TR diagnosis of BPD were treated for 12 weeks with paliperidone ER (3–6 mg/day). They were assessed at baseline, week 4, and week 12, using the CGI-Severity item, the BPRS, the HDRS, the HARS, the SOFAS, the BPD Severity Index (BPDSI), and the Barratt Impulsiveness Scale (BIS-11). Adverse events were evaluated with the DOTES. Paliperidone ER was shown to be effective and well tolerated in reducing severity of global symptomatology and specific BPD symptoms, such as impulsive dyscontrol, anger, and cognitive-perceptual disturbances. Results need to be replicated in controlled trials.


Author(s):  
Shaunak Ajit Ajinkya ◽  
Pranita Shantanu Sharma ◽  
Aparna Ramakrishnan

Introduction: Personality disorders are a group of behavioural patterns associated with significant personal and socio-occupational disturbances. Numerous studies have demonstrated borderline personality to be one of the most common personality disorders. It’s less often diagnosed with just a clinical assessment. Aim: To examine the proportion of patients with Borderline Personality Disorder (BPD), and its associated personality types and clinical syndromes, using the Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory version-III (MCMI-III). Materials and Methods: A retrospective observational study was carried out on 450 adult patients who attended the psychiatry outpatient department of an urban tertiary care hospital. They had been administered the MCMI-III, a self-rating questionnaire commonly used to provide information on personality types and associated clinical syndromes. Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (IBM SPSS, Windows) version 20.0 was used for statistical analyses. Data was expressed in terms of actual number, mean and percentages. Chi-Square or Fisher’s-exact test, as appropriate, was used for categorical data to test for associations. Odds ratio was estimated to measure strength of the association. Results: Borderline was the most common personality type comprising nearly half (46.63%) of the study population. 25.5% had borderline traits while 21.1% had Borderline Personality Disorder (BPD). BPD was significantly higher in females (p<0.001), younger age group below the age of 40 years (p<0.001) and unmarried persons (p<0.001). It was comorbid most with Anxiety (90.91%; OR=4.05; p<0.001), Major Depression (85.23%; OR=18.39; p<0.001), Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) (46.59%; OR=6.30; p<0.001) and Thought disorders (56.82%; OR=18.15; p<0.001). Alcohol (22.73%; OR=3.54; p<0.001) and Drug dependence (13.64%; OR=11.52; p<0.001) were also seen significantly higher in patients with BPD. Personality types significantly comorbid with BPD were Sadistic, Depressive, Masochistic, Negativistic, Schizotypal, Avoidant, Dependent, Antisocial and Paranoid types, with odds being most for Sadistic personality (OR=9.44). Conclusion: It is recommended that mental health professionals and clinicians should start to look for underlying symptoms of BPD in patients of anxiety and mood syndromes. If found these patients should be directed for psychotherapy as early as possible. The MCMI psychological test would be an important contribution to this area, given the need for systematic, quick, and objective testing methods that facilitate the diagnosis.


BJPsych Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (S1) ◽  
pp. S122-S122
Author(s):  
Nyakomi Adwok ◽  
Sharon Nightingale

AimsThe overarching aim of the session was to address and reduce stigma around Borderline Personality Disorder among doctors. The three main objectives were:To increase empathy and understanding around Borderline Personality Disorder by exposing junior doctors to service user perspectives outside a clinical setting;To address knowledge gaps identified by junior doctors in a self-reported questionnaire disseminated prior to the teaching session;To offer junior doctors a basic psychological framework to base their assessment and formulation of service users with personality disorders.Background‘Borderline Personality Disorder: The Person Behind the Label’ was the title of the first co-produced teaching session in the Leeds and York Partnership Foundation Trust (LYPFT). Prior to the teaching session, an online questionnaire was sent out to trainees. The results highlighted three key issues:Negative attitudes towards service users with personality disorders;Poor subjective knowledge of the psychological models of personality disorders;Perception among trainees that they do not receive adequate training to deal with the challenges service users with personality disorders present.MethodA teaching session was co-produced by a team of two service users, a principal clinical psychologist within the Leeds Personality Disorder Network (PDN) and a core Psychiatry trainee. It was delivered in a 75 minute session to 40 attendees consisting of both trainee doctors and consultants.ResultFeedback was collected immediately after the session through the use of anonymous feedback forms. The response to the training was overwhelmingly positive with all 28 respondents rating the session as 4/5 or 5/5 on a satisfaction scale ranging from 1 (poor) to excellent (5). Key themes from the feedback included appreciation for the service user perspective and teaching on psychological theory. The fourth question in the questionnaire: “How will this teaching impact your work?” produced the highest number of responses (25/28) and provided evidence that the above listed objectives of the session were met.ConclusionCo-produced teaching has great potential to address negative attitudes around highly stigmatised conditions by bridging the gap that often exists between service users and mental health professionals.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document