Long-term impact of temporary and persistent personality disorder on anxiety and depressive disorders

Reliability of the ICD-11 personality disorder severity ratings and diagnosis

The present study aimed to investigate the interrater reliability of the dichotomous and dimensional personality disorder (PD) diagnoses based on the overall severity assessment on a rating form consisting of 18 anchored items encompassing diagnostic requirements of the International Classification of Diseases 11th Revision (ICD-11). We also aimed to examine the extent of consistency within the diagnostic requirements grouped under the domains of self- and interpersonal functioning, specific manifestations of personality dysfunction, and distress and impairment in psychosocial functioning. Our data involved a total of 184 inter-ratings of 46 consenting patients by the same set of four clinicians. The chance-corrected agreement levels were estimated at intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) = 0.89 for the overall severity composite, ICC = 0.83 for the dimensional PD diagnosis and Fleiss' kappa = 0.77 for the dichotomous PD diagnosis. Internal consistency analysis of the overall severity composite and the domain composites revealed Cronbach's alpha coefficients approaching or exceeding 0.90 level. Our findings suggest that the diagnostic requirements listed in the ICD-11 and related documents for the severity determination in PD compose an internally consistent set. With the guidance of a rating form comprised of anchored items covering this set, competency-level clinicians are likely to perform reliable evaluations of the severity of personality disturbance, and dimensional and dichotomous PD diagnoses. The development of semi-structured interviews that would further facilitate the task of inspecting and rating each diagnostic requirement reliably will possibly enhance the implementation of the ICD-11 classification for PD around the world.

The sensitivity of the ICD-11 trait model to the symptoms of clinical disorders in young adults

Hierarchical psychopathology contributes to providing a broader picture of the links between emerging personality structures such as the DSM-5/ICD-11 trait models and clinical disorders. The present study aimed to predict the specific and general clinical symptoms by the less studied constructs of the ICD-11 model (negative affectivity, detachment, dissociality, disinhibition, and anankastia). Data from 642 young adults from Iran (63% female, 18-34 years) were collected by three mental symptom scales and the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5), which was recently used to harmonize the constructs of the DSM-5 and ICD-11 trait models. Multiple linear regressions showed that the ICD-11 model significantly predicted both the specific clinical symptoms (ranging from R2 = 0.15 to 0.40) and the general factor of clinical symptoms extracted by exploratory factor analysis (R2 = 0.40, all p < 0.001). Negative affectivity was the strongest construct correlated with both the specific symptoms (ranging from β = 0.36 to 0.69) and the general symptom factor (β = 0.59, all p < 0.001). Because the ICD-11 trait model is a practical structure related to the clinical psychopathology in young adults, screening for maladaptive traits can help clinicians in case formulation for diagnosis and treatment.

Examining the construct validity of the Personality Assessment Questionnaire for ICD-11 (PAQ-11) personality trait domains in a community sample

The ICD-11 has a new diagnostic system for personality disorder, which includes five optional trait specifiers to characterize the diagnosed pathology. The current study evaluated the internal structure and construct validity of the Personality Assessment Questionnaire for ICD-11 (PAQ-11) personality trait domains in a US population-representative community sample. An exploratory factor analysis revealed the support for a four-factor model underlying the 17 PAQ-11 items, reflecting four of the five ICD-11 trait domains (Negative Affectivity, Detachment, Disinhibition and Anankastia). Moreover, correlation analyses revealed that the PAQ-11 domain scale scores were associated, as expected, with their counterparts from two other ICD-11 trait domain measures, as well as with traditional personality disorder scores. More broadly, the results raised questions about the structural integrity of the Dissociality domain scale, and the discriminant validity of the Disinhibition and Anankastia scales. The overall conclusion was nevertheless promising with respect to the PAQ-11 serving as a brief screening measure for the ICD-11 trait domains.

Personality Pathology and Functional Impairment in Patients With Hypochondriasis

BACKGROUND

Research indicates substantial co-occurance of personality pathology and hypochondriasis, which both involve significant psychosocial impairment.

OBJECTIVE

This study sought to investigate the role of personality pathology for explaining functional impairment in patients with hypochondriasis, while accounting for the influence of health anxiety severity.

METHODS

Patients diagnosed with hypochondriasis (N = 84; 60% women) were administered interview- and self-report instruments for personality pathology, health anxiety severity, and functional impairment (general, social, and physical): The Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV Axis II (SCID-II), the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5), the Short Health Anxiety Inventory (SHAI), the 36-item Short Form health survey (SF-36), and the Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF). Hierarchical regression analyses were performed with boot-strapping (1000 samples).

RESULTS

Findings overall showed that personality pathology incrementally explained functional impairment over the influence of health anxiety severity. More specifically, findings revealed that the incremental effect of PID-5 trait dimensions was substantially larger than the SCID-II personality disorder criterion-count. Functional impairment was specifically associated with SCID-II symptoms of Avoidant Personality disorder and dependent personality disorder as well as PID-5 trait domains of negative affectivity, detachment, and psychoticism.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings highlight the potential significance of personality pathology for understanding and clinical management of functional impairment in patients with hypochondriasis. The personality features that best explained functional impairment were avoidant personality disorder and dependent personality disorder and, in particular, DSM-5 and the International Classification of Diseases, 11th revision personality trait domains of negative affectivity, detachment, and psychoticism.

Examining the reliability and validity of the ICD-11 personality disorder severity diagnosis

OBJECTIVES

The International Classification of Diseases, 11th edition includes a new personality disorder diagnosis, in light of growing concerns of the categorical personality disorder diagnoses. The purpose of the current study was to examine the reliability and validity of the severity dimension of the new International Classification of Diseases, 11th edition diagnosis, through multi-method assessment.

METHOD

In a community mental health sample (n = 311), we examined the interrater reliability of the severity diagnosis and evaluated the diagnosis against self-report measures of dimensional personality pathology and psychopathology constructs and traditional categorical and informant-report measures.

RESULTS

Intraclass correlations indicated 'excellent' reliability of the diagnostic ratings. Large associations were observed between the International Classification of Diseases, 11th edition clinician diagnosis and overall impairment measures. Generally, the International Classification of Diseases, 11th edition clinician diagnosis exhibited largest associations with measures of internalising dysfunction, and more variable associations with interpersonal and externalising impairment. The International Classification of Diseases, 11th edition clinician diagnosis showed a large association with borderline personality disorder symptom scores and moderate associations with Paranoid, Schizoid and Avoidant personality disorder scores. Similar patterns emerged of the associations between the International Classification of Diseases, 11th edition personality disorder diagnosis with self-report and informant-report measures, although the associations were larger with self-report measures.

CONCLUSION

These findings provide promising initial evidence for the reliability and validity of the new International Classification of Diseases, 11th edition personality disorder diagnosis, indicating that the new conceptualisation of personality disorders may address issues within the categorical model.

Relationships between treatments received in the Nottingham Study of Neurotic Disorder over 30 years and personality status

We compared the drug treatments and health service contacts of anxious and depressed patients separated by personality disturbance in 200 patients over 30 years. Contact details with health professionals at 5, 12 and 30 years were recorded and analysed by multilevel models at all time points. Over 30 years, patients with dependent and anankastic personality disturbance and cothymia (the general neurotic syndrome) were 2.27 times more likely to receive selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) and new antidepressants (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.22-4.24), particularly paroxetine, and were 1.6 weeks (95% CI: 1.2-2.3) longer on the drug than those without the syndrome. Similar results with SSRIs and new antidepressants in patients with personality disorder fell short of significance after adjusting for age, sex and DSM status. Most patients had a DSM diagnosis at follow-up points, and these had increased psychological treatment, psychiatric admissions, multiple drugs, SSRIs and new antidepressants. At later follow-up, most drug treatments decreased apart from psychological treatment, SSRIs and new antidepressants, and baseline personality disorder had little impact on treatment histories compared with others. We conclude that the (Galenic) general neurotic syndrome is associated with greater use of treatments in the long term, showing that combined personality and symptomatic pathology overcomes that of personality disorder alone.

Premature mortality of people with personality disorder in the Nottingham Study of Neurotic Disorder

It is known that people with personality disorders die prematurely. This may be connected to high levels of co-morbidity with other psychiatric disorders. To test whether mortality was independent, deaths were examined in a 31-year cohort study of anxious and depressed patients (Nottingham Study of Neurotic Disorder) who also had their personality status assessed at baseline. The severity of personality disturbance was assessed using a method previously used to separate personality disorders into ICD-11 categories. Over the follow-up period, 71 of the cohort of 201 patients had died. Age at death was 5.1 (M) and 5.2 (F) years younger in those with personality disorder compared with no personality disorder, but after adjusting for age at randomization and clinical diagnosis at baseline, these differences reduced to 1.5 (M) and 1.6 (F) years. The longevity of the group was 12 to 18 years less than the general population (p < 0.0001), reinforcing previous findings of premature mortality in common mental illness. Analysis of causes of death showed no meaningful differences in personality groups. The hypothesis that premature death in personality disturbance is independent of mental health status was not supported in this study, despite other evidence from this cohort that general clinical outcome is worse in those with personality disorder. © 2019 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

ICD-11 Personality Disorders: Utility and Implications of the New Model

The ICD-11 classification of personality disorders represents a paradigm shift in diagnosis. This was felt necessary because previous personality disorder classifications had major problems. These included unnecessary complexity, inconsistency with data on normal personality traits, and minimal consideration of severity despite this being shown to be the major predictor of outcome. The ICD-11 classification abolishes all categories of personality disorder except for a general description of personality disorder. This diagnosis can be further specified as "mild," "moderate," or "severe." Patient behavior can be described using one or more of five personality trait domains; negative affectivity, dissociality, anankastia, detachment, and disinhibition. Clinicians may also specify a borderline pattern qualifier. The ICD-11 shows considerable alignment with the DSM-5 Alternative Model for Personality Disorders. Early evidence around the reliability and validity of the new model appear promising, although at present there is still limited specific evidence due to the model being so recently finalized. However, for the model to be successful, it needs to be embraced by clinicians and used widely in normal clinical practice.

Personality Disorders in the ICD-11: Opportunities and Challenges for Advancing the Diagnosis of Personality Pathology

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The International Classification of Diseases-11th edition (ICD-11) is poised to make a dramatic change in the diagnosis of personality disorders by introducing a fully dimensionalized framework. In this paper, the history of this process is reviewed, along with international efforts taken to address some underlying concerns with this transition. Recent studies of this framework are also reviewed.

RECENT FINDINGS

Studies have concluded that the ICD-11 proposal is supported; however, there are a number of methodological limitations to these studies, including the utilization of measures that are not directly derived from the ICD-11 description of levels of personality severity and trait domains. There is a clear need for additional studies with measures that directly reflect the ICD-11 description of personality disorders. While there are some potentially positive effects of moving toward the dimensional model, there are a number of concerns remaining about the clinical utility of moving in this way.

Evaluating the assessment of the ICD-11 personality disorder diagnostic system

Proposed for the ICD-11 is a dimensional model of personality disorder that, if approved, would be a paradigm shift in the conceptualization of personality disorder. The proposal consists of a general severity rating, 5 maladaptive personality trait domains, and a borderline pattern qualifier. The general severity rating can be assessed by the Standardized Assessment of Severity of Personality Disorder (SASPD), the trait domains by the Personality Inventory for ICD-11 (PiCD), and the borderline pattern by the Borderline Pattern Scale (BPS), which is developed in the present study. To date, no study has examined the relations among all 3 components, due in part to the absence of direct measures for each component (until recently). The current study develops and provides initial validation evidence for the BPS, and examines the relations among the BPS, SASPD, and PiCD. Also considered is their relationship with the 5-factor model of general personality as well as with 2 other measures of personality disorder severity (including the DSM-5 Level of Personality Functioning Scale [LPFS]). Further, an alternative trait-based coding of the DSM-5 LPFS is examined (modeled after the ICD-11 SASPD), suggesting that its coverage of diverse maladaptivity may not be because it assesses the core of personality disorder, but rather because it has items specific to the different domains of personality. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).

The Development of the ICD-11 Classification of Personality Disorders: An Amalgam of Science, Pragmatism, and Politics

The nomenclature of personality disorders in the 11th revision of the International Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems represents the most radical change in the classification history of personality disorders. A dimensional structure now replaces categorical description. It was argued by the Working Group that only a dimensional system was consistent with the empirical evidence and, in the spirit of clinical utility, the new system is based on two steps. The first step is to assign one of five levels of severity, and the second step is to assign up to five prominent domain traits. There was resistance to this structure from those who feel that categorical diagnosis, particularly of borderline personality disorder, should be retained. After lengthy discussion, described in detail here, there is now an option for a borderline pattern descriptor to be selected as a diagnostic option after severity has been determined.

Diagnosis and classification of personality disorders: novel approaches

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To provide an update of the recent studies, which have evaluated the radical changes in personality disorder classification in DSM-5 and ICD-11.

RECENT FINDINGS

Although the DSM-5 Committee rejected the personality disorders Work Group proposal for personality disorder classification, the model was published in DSM-5 Section III. This Alternative Model of Personality Disorders (AMPD) has been widely adopted by the research community resulting in multiple studies evaluating its reliability and clinical utility. The ICD-11 Personality Classification has recently been accepted by the WHO and is also receiving increasing study. Both models emphasize personality disorder severity, which most studies report is consistently linked to impairment and outcome. Both models propose five descriptive domains, which appear to capture most of the current personality disorder diagnoses, and can also be linked to disease extremes of normal personality such as the Five Factor Model.

SUMMARY

The changes in DSM-5 AMPD and ICD-11 represent a significant paradigm shift in the diagnosis of personality disorders. Early research suggests that the changes may be beneficial for clinicians and researchers. The models more closely align with the large body of literature supporting dimensional models of normal personality. The severity dimensions are consistent with the large body of evidence that personality disorder severity is a strong determinant of impairment and outcome. It remains to be seen if clinicians will use the classification to plan and predict treatment for a wide range of mental disorders.

Against the Stream: Generalised anxiety disorder (GAD) - a redundant diagnosis

The diagnosis of generalised anxiety disorder is a distraction of no value. It is highly unreliable, co-occurring with many other disorders of firmer diagnostic status, and has intrinsic connections to personality dysfunction. It is argued that classification would be heartily relieved to rid itself of this unnecessary appendage and for the symptom of anxiety to remain as a descriptive term only. Declaration of interest None.

A self-report measure for the ICD-11 dimensional trait model proposal: The personality inventory for ICD-11

Proposed for the 11th edition of the World Health Organization's International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11) is a dimensional trait model for the classification of personality disorder (Tyrer, Reed, & Crawford, 2015). The ICD-11 proposal consists of 5 broad domains: negative affective, detachment, dissocial, disinhibition, and anankastic (Mulder, Horwood, Tyrer, Carter, & Joyce, 2016). Several field trials have examined this proposal, yet none has included a direct measure of the trait model. The purpose of the current study was to develop and provide initial validation for the Personality Inventory for ICD-11 (PiCD), a self-report measure of this proposed 5-domain maladaptive trait model. Item selection and scale construction proceeded through 3 initial data collections assessing potential item performance. Two subsequent studies were conducted for scale validation. In Study 1, the PiCD was evaluated in a sample of 259 MTurk participants (who were or had been receiving mental health treatment) with respect to 2 measures of general personality structure: The Eysenck Personality Questionnaire-Revised and the 5-Dimensional Personality Test. In Study 2, the PiCD was evaluated in an additional sample of 285 participants with respect to 2 measures of maladaptive personality traits: The Personality Inventory for DSM-5 and the Computerized Adaptive Test for Personality Disorders. Study 3 provides an item-level exploratory structural equation model with the combined samples from Studies 1 and 2. The results are discussed with respect to the validity of the measure and the potential benefits for future research in having a direct, self-report measure of the ICD-11 trait proposal. (PsycINFO Database Record

Dimensional personality traits and alcohol treatment outcome: a systematic review and meta-analysis

AIMS

To identify dimensional personality traits associated with treatment outcome for patients with an alcohol use disorder (AUD).

METHODS

Systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical trials and longitudinal studies of ≥ 8 weeks in patients receiving treatment for AUD, in which the association between personality dimensions and treatment outcome was reported. Primary outcomes were relapse and alcohol consumption measures. Treatment retention was a secondary outcome.

RESULTS

Eighteen studies, including 4783 subjects, were identified. Twelve studies used Cloninger's Temperament and Personality Questionnaire (TPQ) or Temperament and Character Inventory (TCI). Remaining studies used a broad range of other personality measures. Compared with non-relapsers, patients who relapsed had higher novelty-seeking [standardized mean difference in novelty-seeking score 0.28; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.12, 0.44], lower persistence (-0.30, 95% = CI -0.48, -0.12), lower reward dependence (-0.16, 95% CI = -0.31, -0.01) and lower cooperativeness (-0.23, 95% CI = -0.41, -0.04). Few studies reported on alcohol consumption outcomes, therefore findings for those outcomes were inconclusive. Lower novelty-seeking predicted better retention in treatment in two of three studies. Most studies reported findings only for those retained in treatment, and did not attempt to account for missing data; therefore, findings for the primary outcomes cannot be generalized to patients who dropped out of treatment. Studies using personality instruments other than the TCI or TPQ reported no consistent findings on the association between personality variables and treatment outcome.

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients receiving treatment for an alcohol use disorder, those who relapse during follow-up have higher novelty-seeking, lower persistence, lower reward dependence and lower cooperativeness than those who do not relapse.

Outpatient psychodynamic group psychotherapy - outcomes related to personality disorder, severity, age and gender

OBJECTIVES

Outpatient group psychotherapy is frequent within specialist services, recruits a mixed population, but effects are poorly documented. This study investigates long-term outcomes for patients with personality disorder (PD) treated in outpatient, psychodynamic groups within secondary mental health service.

METHODS

A naturalistic study (N = 103) with repeated assessments of process and clinical outcomes. Longitudinal statistics are linear mixed models.

RESULTS

The main PDs were avoidant, borderline and NOS PD, mean number of PDs 1.4(SD0.7), 60% females and mean initial age 38(SD10) years. Mean treatment duration was 1.5(SD 0.9) years. Therapist alliance and experienced group climate was satisfactory and stable. Improvements were significant (symptom distress, interpersonal problems, occupational functioning and additional mental health services), irrespective of general PD-severity, but not of PD-type, age or gender. The study demonstrates PD NOS benefits across all outcomes, occupational improvements for avoidant PD, despite prevailing symptoms, but generally poorer outcomes for males and age >38 years. For borderline PD, experienced conflict was stronger, treatment duration shorter and outcomes poor for early drop-outs (28%).

CONCLUSION

Psychodynamic group psychotherapy is a recommendable treatment for moderate PDs, which may address avoidant strategies, but may not meet clinical challenges of borderline PD. The outcome differences related to gender and age are noteworthy. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.