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

Development and Validation of Dimensional Clinical Personality Inventory 2 (IDCP-2) Algorithms to Assess ICD-11 Personality Trait Domain Qualifiers

With the advent of the new diagnostic model for personality disorders in the 11th revision of the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11), researchers and practitioners in World Health Organization signatory countries are urged to implement it. This study aims to develop a brief, reliable, and valid scale for assessing maladaptive personality traits according to the ICD-11 model, using the item pool of the Dimensional Clinical Personality Inventory (IDCP-2). Quantitative and qualitative criteria for item selection were applied to a sample of 251 Brazilian adults. As a result, the 25 items (five items per factor) were selected, demonstrating promising evidence of validity based on the internal structure with a database of 1,659 Brazilian adults. In addition, we found good evidence of validity based on relationships with external variables, particularly those related to personality pathology, in a sample of 617 Brazilian adults. The implications of these findings are discussed.

A Consumer Perspective on Personality Diagnostic Systems: One Size Does Not Fit All

Although providers and patients may largely agree on what is essential to clinically useful assessment and diagnosis, patients have a unique voice and contribute additional information to our conceptualization of clinical utility. The current study evaluated the clinical utility of three diagnostic models (Section II categorial, Section III hybrid, and the original ICD-11 dimensional) from the consumer/user perspective. Participants included 703 undergraduate students and 154 family members or individuals with borderline personality disorder. Participants rated mock diagnostic reports on six indices of clinical utility. Results indicated that undergraduates favored categorical reports over the original ICD-11 dimensional reports on three of six indices but rated categorical and hybrid reports as essentially equivalent. In the patient/family sample, participants favored the hybrid or categorical model on all indices. Our findings speak to the value of a clear diagnostic label and suggest that future iterations of the DSM adopting a hybrid or dimensional model should have a continued focus on simplicity in communication.

Cross-walking personality disorder types to ICD-11 trait domains: An overview of current findings

The ICD-11 has adopted a classification of Personality Disorders (PD) that abolishes the established categorical PD types in favor of global severity classification with specification of individual trait domains. To facilitate and guide this profound transition, an overview of current research on empirical associations between established PD types and ICD-11 trait domains seems warranted. We identified a total of 9 relevant studies from 2018 to 2022, which were based on both clinical and community samples from U.S., China, Brazil, Denmark, Spain, Korea, and Canada. The patterns of associations with ICD-11 trait domains were systematically synthesized and portrayed for each PD type. Findings overall showed expected and conceptually meaningful associations between categorical PD types and ICD-11 trait domains, with only few deviations. Based on these findings, we propose a cross-walk for translating categorical PD types into ICD-11 trait domains. More research is needed in order to further guide continuity and translation between ICD-10 and ICD-11 PD classification in mental healthcare, including facet-level ICD-11 trait information. Moreover, the nine reviewed studies only relied on self-reported ICD-11 trait domains, which should be expanded with clinician-rated trait domains in future research. Finally, future research should also take ICD-11's essential PD severity classification into account.

Clinical Implications of ICD-11 for Diagnosing and Treating Personality Disorders

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The International Classification of Diseases 11th revision (ICD-11) introduced a new approach to personality disorders and related traits. This paper reviews recent literature on the assessment of ICD-11 personality disorders and implications for clinical diagnosis, decision-making, and treatment.

RECENT FINDINGS

We reviewed findings on two measures developed for the ICD-11 model of personality dysfunction and six inventories for the ICD-11 trait specifiers. The psychometric qualities of these tools are promising, and they allow for both rapid screening and fine-grained assessment. Implications for clinical diagnosis and treatment of personality disorders are reviewed including utility for forensic practice. Based on evidence and our experience, we provide some recommendations for severity- and trait-informed interventions. Initial evidence supports the available instruments for assessing ICD-11 personality disorders. More research is needed including development of clinician-rating forms and diagnostic interviews as well as treatment protocols and trials based on the new ICD-11 classification.

Efficacy and tolerability of pharmacotherapy for obsessive-compulsive personality disorder: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials

INTRODUCTION

Although obsessive-compulsive personality disorder (OCPD) is one of the most prevalent personality disorders, it is one of the least studied. There is debate as to whether pharmacotherapy is efficacious for OCPD. We aimed to systematically evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of pharmacotherapy for OCPD.

AREAS COVERED

This systematic review found two randomized controlled trials investigating pharmacotherapy of OCPD. In a study of major depression (n = 308) with comorbid OCPD (n = 71), citalopram was more effective for OCPD than sertraline with fewer drop-outs from treatment. In a small study of OCPD (n = 24), fluvoxamine was more effective than placebo, and there was a low drop-out rate. Risk of bias and quality assessment of these studies was not possible, and findings have very low levels of certainty.

EXPERT OPINION

Two studies provide preliminary evidence in support of citalopram and fluvoxamine for OCPD. Further randomized controlled trials are required before firm conclusions can be drawn regarding efficacy of pharmacotherapy for OCPD.

The clinical utility of the ICD-11 classification of personality disorders and related traits: A preliminary scoping review

OBJECTIVES

A diagnostic system that fails to deliver clinically useful information will not be utilized and consequently will be unable to provide valuable data for health policy and clinical decision making. Therefore, it is imperative to obtain an accurate depiction of the clinical utility of the eleventh revision of the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11) Personality Disorder (PD) model. The current mixed-methods systematic review aimed to determine the clinical utility of the ICD-11 PD classification system.

METHOD

An electronic screening of six databases was conducted and resulting studies were subjected to specific exclusion criteria, which elicited eight studies of interest. Study characteristics were tabulated and methodological quality was appraised.

RESULTS

Four studies offered strong support for the model's clinical utility, three offered some support accompanied by notable limitations and one study could only offer criticisms.

CONCLUSION

Future investigation of the ICD-11 PD classification system's (a) communicative value between clinicians and their patients, and between clinicians and their patient's families; (b) ease of use; and (c) feasibility in terms of practical application is required to achieve a complete understanding of its clinical utility and ultimately bring clarity to the current ambiguous findings.

Semi-structured interview for personality functioning DSM-5 (STiP-5.1): Psychometric evaluation of the Czech version

The DSM-5 Alternative Model for Personality Disorders introduced a dimensional perspective on personality disorders and their assessment by measuring personality functioning in the following domains: Identity, Self-Direction, Empathy, and Intimacy. This study provides a replication of the psychometric evaluation of the Semi-Structured Interview for Personality Functioning DSM-5 (STiP-5.1) within a mixed clinical sample and a community sample. The sample consisted of 188 adults: 86 participants from the general population and 102 people from a mixed clinical sample. All participants completed the STiP-5.1 and Level of Personality Functioning Scale-Brief Form (LPFS-BF 2.0). Results showed good internal consistency (McDonald's ω = 0.89-0.94) and promising convergent validity (correlations with LPFS-BF 2.0 above 0.6) of the STiP-5.1. Its scores differentiated participants within the community sample from those in the mixed clinical sample with large effect sizes (r_rb = 0.77-0.88). Moreover, the impairment in personality functioning was more pronounced in people with personality disorders than in other psychiatric disorders (medium effect size, r_rb = 0.46-0.57), supporting the notion of a continuum of personality functioning impairment. The STiP-5.1 therefore offers an instrument with satisfactory psychometric properties for the assessment of personality functioning both for research and clinical practice.

ICD-11 Personality Disorders: A Psychodynamic Perspective on Personality Functioning

The new ICD-11 introduces a fully dimensional classification of personality disorders representing a fundamental change in personality disorder diagnosis with major implications for clinical practice and research. The new system centers on the evaluation of the severity of impairment in the areas of self and interpersonal functioning. This focus on personality functioning converges with long-standing psychoanalytic/psychodynamic conceptualizations of personality pathology. In a detailed conceptual analysis and review of existing empirical data, points of convergence and notable differences between major exponents of the psychodynamic tradition-object relations theory as developed by Kernberg et al. and the Operationalized Psychodynamic Diagnosis-and the ICD-11 system are critically discussed. Personality functioning can be considered to be the current "common ground" for the assessment of personality disorders and constitutes a considerable step forward in making personality disorder diagnosis both clinically meaningful and suitable for research purposes.

Integration of the ICD-11 and DSM-5 Dimensional Systems for Personality Disorders Into a Unified Taxonomy With Non-overlapping Traits

The promise of replacing the diagnostic categories of personality disorder with a better-grounded system has been only partially met. We still need to understand whether our main dimensional taxonomies, those of the International Classification of Diseases, 11th Revision (ICD-11) and the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5), are the same or different, and elucidate whether a unified structure is possible. We also need truly independent pathological domains, as they have shown unacceptable overlap so far. To inquire into these points, the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5) and the Personality Inventory for ICD-11 (PiCD) were administered to 677 outpatients. Disattenuated correlation coefficients between 0.84 and 0.93 revealed that both systems share four analogous traits: negative affectivity, detachment, dissociality/antagonism, and disinhibition. These traits proved scalar equivalence too, such that scores in the two questionnaires are roughly interchangeable. These four domains plus psychoticism formed a theoretically consistent and well-fitted five-factor structure, but they overlapped considerably, thereby reducing discriminant validity. Only after the extraction of a general personality disorder factor (g-PD) through bifactor analysis, we could attain a comprehensive model bearing mutually independent traits.

Obsessive-Compulsive (Anankastic) Personality Disorder in the ICD-11: A Scoping Review

Introduction: With the shift from a categorical to a dimensional model, ICD-11 has made substantial changes to the diagnosis of personality disorders (PDs), including obsessive-compulsive (anankastic) personality disorder (OCPD). The ICD-11 PD model proposes a single diagnosis of PD with specifications regarding severity and domains. However, a systematic overview of ICD-11 anankastia is lacking. In this review we address the reformulation of the OCPD diagnosis in the ICD-11, and draw comparisons with the DSM-5, with a particular focus on diagnostic validity and clinical utility. We hypothesized that the ICD-11 PD model provides a diagnostically valid and clinically useful approach to OCPD, with specific emphasis on the anankastia domain as the primary trait qualifier. Methods: Literature published from 2010 to 2020 was systematically searched using the PubMed/MEDLINE, PsychInfo, Cochrane, and Web of Sciences search engines, in order to find all articles that addressed ICD-11 anankastia. Relevant articles were collated, and themes of these articles subsequently extracted. Results: Out of the 264 publications identified, 19 articles were included in this review. Four themes were identified, namely (a) overlap of DSM-5 OCPD with the ICD-11 PD model, (b) the factorial structure of the ICD-11 PD model with respect to the anankastia domain, (c) the clinical utility of the ICD-11 PD model, and (d) comparison of the ICD-11 PD model of anankastia with the DSM-5 alternative model for OCPD. Conclusions: The ICD-11 anankastia domain overlaps with DSM-5 OCPD traits, and the factor analyses of the ICD-11 PD model further support the diagnostic validity of this domain. There is some support for the clinical utility of the ICD-11 PD model of anankastia but further studies are needed, including of its relationship to obsessive-compulsive and related disorders.

Klinische Stadienmodelle in der Früherkennung und -behandlung der Borderline-Persönlichkeitsstörung

Hintergrund

Die Borderline-Persönlichkeitsstörung (BPS) ist eine schwere psychische Störung, die typischerweise erstmals in der Adoleszenz auftritt und mit einem hohen Leidensdruck, schweren psychosozialen Defiziten bei Betroffenen sowie hohen Kosten für die Gesellschaft verbunden ist. Die Früherkennung und -intervention der BPS haben zum Ziel, die negativen Auswirkungen der Störung frühzeitig zu reduzieren oder zu verhindern und dadurch die Lebensläufe der betroffenen Jugendlichen positiv zu beeinflussen. Klinische Stadienmodelle bieten Orientierung bei der Auswahl einer geeigneten Intervention entsprechend dem aktuellen Krankheitsstadium.

Ziel der Arbeit

In der vorliegenden Arbeit wird das Rationale klinischer Stadienmodelle erläutert. Bestehende Stadienmodelle der BPS werden vorgestellt und diskutiert.

Material und Methoden

Kritische Reflexion vorhandener Forschungsliteratur.

Ergebnisse

Bisher wurden 2 Stadienmodelle der BPS vorgeschlagen, das erste Modell aus dem Jahr 2016 gemeinsam für die BPS und die affektiven Störungen, das neuere, darauf aufbauende Modell aus dem Jahr 2019 mit höherer Spezifität und Fokus auf die Entwicklung von Persönlichkeitsstörungen und sich daraus ergebenden Schwierigkeiten.

Diskussion

Die vorgestellten klinischen Stadienmodelle der BPS bieten Orientierung bei der Beschreibung des typischen Krankheitsverlaufs sowie der Auswahl einer geeigneten Intervention, insbesondere in frühen Krankheitsstadien, da sie dabei helfen können, frühe, unspezifische Anzeichen einer sich entwickelnden Störung wahrzunehmen und eine geeignete Behandlung einzuleiten. Mit weiteren Erkenntnissen über die Entwicklung der BPS und effektive Interventionen können Stadienmodelle in der Zukunft weiter verbessert werden.