Diagnosis and classification of personality disorders: novel approaches

Practical implications of ICD-11 personality disorder classifications

Personality disorders (PDs) are associated with an inferior quality of life, poor health, and premature mortality, leading to heavy clinical, familial, and societal burdens. The International Classification of Diseases-11 (ICD-11) makes a thorough, dramatic paradigm shift from the categorical to dimensional diagnosis of PD and expands the application into adolescence. We have reviewed the recent literature on practical implications, and severity and trait measures of ICD-11 defined PDs, by comparing with the alternative model of personality disorders in the fifth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5), by mentioning the relevance in forensic and social concerns, and by referencing the developmental implication of life span, especially in adolescence. Study results strongly support the dimensional utility of ICD-11 PD diagnosis and application in adolescence which warrants early detection and intervention. More evidence-based research is needed along the ICD-11 PD application, such as its social relevance, measurement simplification, and longitudinal design of lifespan observation and treatment.

Adverse childhood experiences and personality functioning interact substantially in predicting depression, anxiety, and somatization

Etiological theories on the development of psychopathology often incorporate adverse childhood experiences (ACE) as an important contributing factor. Recent studies suggest personality functioning (PF; i.e., stability of the self and interpersonal relationships) as an important transdiagnostic construct that could be useful in better understanding when persons with ACE do (not) develop psychopathological symptoms. A representative sample of N = 2363 was assessed by questionnaires on ACE, PF (Level of Personality Functioning Scale-Brief Form 2.0), and current symptoms of depression, anxiety, and somatization (Brief Symptom Inventory 18). The interaction between ACE and PF on symptoms was investigated using multiple group models and Bayesian structural equation modeling. ACE were positively associated with psychopathology and PF impairments. The interaction effect between ACE and PF explained incremental variance in current symptoms, ranging from 26% for somatization to 49% for depression with the complete model explaining up to 91% of the latent variance in psychopathology. Our findings indicate a diathesis-stress model with PF as a resource or resilience that may buffer against the development of symptoms in the face of adversity. Treatments of depression and anxiety targeting self and interpersonal functioning therefore may lead to improvements in resilience and relapse prevention. [Correction added on 15 March 2023, after first online publication: Level of Personality Functioning Scale-Brief Form has been replaced to Level of Personality Functioning Scale-Brief Form 2.0 ].

Psychometric properties of the Persian version of short-form five factor borderline inventory (FFBI-SF)

BACKGROUND

The Five-Factor Borderline Inventory-Short Form (FFBI-SF) is a self-report measure developed to assess traits of Borderline Personality Disorder (BPD) from the perspective of the Five-Factor Model of general personality. This study was designed to examine the factor structure, internal consistency, and convergent/discriminant validity of the Persian FFBI-SF in a sample of Iranian university students.

METHODS

A total of 641 university students (M-age = 28.04, SD = 8.21, 66.7% women) completed the online forms of the FFBI-SF, PID-5-BF, and Mini IPIP.

RESULTS

Confirmatory factor analysis supported the original and modified (without item 47) twelve-factor models. Also, Cronbach's alpha (α) for the FFBI-SF scores ranged from unacceptable to excellent ranges. However, when relying on MIC values to measure internal consistency, the FFBI-SF Total and subscale scores demonstrated adequate internal consistency. Finally, the FFBI Total and subscale scores showed the expected relations with other personality measures scores (e.g., Neuroticism, Antagonism, and Conscientiousness), which supports the validity of the interpretation of the FFBI-SF scores.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings indicated that FFBI-SF is a useful tool with sound psychometric properties for assessing BPD traits in Iranian students and may spark research in other Iranian settings (e.g., community and clinical samples).

Behavioral and neurophysiological correlates of emotional face processing in borderline personality disorder: are there differences between men and women?

Emotional dysregulation is a core feature of borderline personality disorder (BPD); it is, for example, known to influence one's ability to read other people's facial expressions. We investigated behavioral and neurophysiological foundations of emotional face processing in individuals with BPD and in healthy controls, taking participants' sex into account. 62 individuals with BPD (25 men, 37 women) and 49 healthy controls (20 men, 29 women) completed an emotion classification task with faces depicting blends of angry and happy expressions while the electroencephalogram was recorded. The cortical activity (late positive potential, P3/LPP) was evaluated using source modeling. Compared to healthy controls, individuals with BPD responded slower to happy but not to angry faces; further, they showed more anger ratings in happy but not in angry faces, especially in those with high ambiguity. Men had lower anger ratings than women and responded slower to angry but not happy faces. The P3/LPP was larger in healthy controls than in individuals with BPD, and larger in women than in men; moreover, women but not men produced enlarged P3/LPP responses to angry vs. happy faces. Sex did not interact with behavioral or P3/LPP-related differences between healthy controls and individuals with BPD. Together, BPD-related alterations in behavioral and P3/LPP correlates of emotional face processing exist in both men and women, supposedly without sex-related interactions. Results point to a general 'negativity bias' in women. Source modeling is well suited to investigate effects of participant and stimulus characteristics on the P3/LPP generators.

Development and initial evaluation of the ICD-11 personality disorder severity scale: PDS-ICD-11

AIM

No measure has formally been developed to assess the published ICD-11 model of Personality Disorder (PD) severity. We therefore set out to develop and evaluate the 14-item Personality Disorder Severity ICD-11 (PDS-ICD-11) scale.

METHOD

A representative U.S. community sample (N = 428; 50.9% women) and a New Zealand mental health sample (N = 87; 61.5% women) completed the PDS-ICD-11 scale along with a series of established PD and impairment measures.

RESULTS

Item response theory supported the unidimensionality of PDS-ICD-11 (median item loading of 0.68) and indicated that a PDS-ICD-11 score of 17.5 may serve as a benchmark for pronounced dysfunction. Correlation and regression analyses supported both criterion validity and incremental validity in predicting impairment and PD symptoms. The PDS-ICD-11 was particularly associated with measures of Level of Personality Functioning Scale (LPFS), Global PD severity, and Borderline PD symptom score. A comparison between clinical individuals diagnosed with an ICD-11 PD vs. no PD supported diagnostic validity.

CONCLUSION

This initial construction study suggests that the PDS-ICD-11 constitutes a promising instrument that provides a quick impression of the severity of personality dysfunction according to the official ICD-11 PD guidelines. Clearly, more research is needed to corroborate its validity and utility. The PDS-ICD-11 scale is provided as online supporting information.

Childhood Traumatic Experiences and Dimensional Models of Personality Disorder in DSM-5 and ICD-11: Opportunities and Challenges

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Childhood trauma is an important risk factor for the development of personality disorders (PDs), yet most research has been devoted to categorical models of personality pathology. Considering the introduction of a dimensional PD model with ICD-11, we review current findings related to various forms of childhood trauma, and PDs, operationalized in the form of personality functioning and maladaptive traits. We focus on the magnitude of associations and examine specific relationships between emotional and physical trauma with areas of personality functioning and single traits.

RECENT FINDINGS

Two studies showed a strong association between childhood trauma and personality dysfunction. Seven studies, including clinical and forensic samples, demonstrated heterogeneous associations between various forms of childhood trauma and maladaptive traits. Overall, four studies indicated a slightly stronger association between personality dysfunction, maladaptive trait expression, and higher levels of emotional trauma than for physical or sexual trauma. Regarding specific trait domains and childhood trauma, most studies yielded the strongest associations for either psychoticism or detachment. Research on childhood trauma and dimensional PD models (i.e., personality functioning and traits) has the potential to contribute to a better understanding of their complex relationship. However, high intercorrelations among different types of childhood trauma, areas of personality functioning, and trait domains increase the difficulty of disentangling single effects. More research is needed including clinical and non-Western samples, especially considering the upcoming ICD-11 classification.

Swedish Universities Scales of Personality: Relation to Other Personality Instruments

OBJECTIVE

To investigate associations between Swedish universities Scales of Personality (SSP) and scales of the following personality instruments: Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-III-R axis II screening questionnaire (SCID-II screen), revised NEO personality inventory (NEO-PI-R), revised Chapman scales (Chapman) and the psychotic traits questionnaire (STQ).

METHODS

Healthy individuals (n=406) completed self-report personality questionnaires including SSP and at least one more personality inventory. Correlations were calculated between the 13 different SSP subscales as well as SSP's three factors and factors and scales/subscales in SCID-II screen, NEO-PI-R, Chapman and STQ. The main factors of the various instruments were factor analysed. ICC were calculated.

RESULTS

SSP Neuroticism factor correlated with SCID-II cluster C (r=0.71), NEO Neuroticism (r=0.80) and Chapman Social anhedonia (r=0.62). SSP Extraversion factor correlated with NEO Extraversion (r=0.63) and SSP Aggressiveness factor with NEO Agreeableness (r=-0.62). Strong correlations between SSP factors and scales and scales of the other instruments were sparse, although weaker correlations were common.

CONCLUSION

SSP is a useful investigation tool when measuring personality traits related to temperament-like features. SSP partly correlates well to especially three of the NEO-PI-R factors. The different personality inventories are not completely comparable to each other. Instead, they measure personality aspects in partly different ways.

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.

An organization- and category-level comparison of diagnostic requirements for mental disorders in ICD-11 and DSM-5

In 2013, the American Psychiatric Association (APA) published the 5th edition of its Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5). In 2019, the World Health Assembly approved the 11th revision of the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11). It has often been suggested that the field would benefit from a single, unified classification of mental disorders, although the priorities and constituencies of the two sponsoring organizations are quite different. During the development of the ICD-11 and DSM-5, the World Health Organization (WHO) and the APA made efforts toward harmonizing the two systems, including the appointment of an ICD-DSM Harmonization Group. This paper evaluates the success of these harmonization efforts and provides a guide for practitioners, researchers and policy makers describing the differences between the two systems at both the organizational and the disorder level. The organization of the two classifications of mental disorders is substantially similar. There are nineteen ICD-11 disorder categories that do not appear in DSM-5, and seven DSM-5 disorder categories that do not appear in the ICD-11. We compared the Essential Features section of the ICD-11 Clinical Descriptions and Diagnostic Guidelines (CDDG) with the DSM-5 criteria sets for 103 diagnostic entities that appear in both systems. We rated 20 disorders (19.4%) as having major differences, 42 disorders (40.8%) as having minor definitional differences, 10 disorders (9.7%) as having minor differences due to greater degree of specification in DSM-5, and 31 disorders (30.1%) as essentially identical. Detailed descriptions of the major differences and some of the most important minor differences, with their rationale and related evidence, are provided. The ICD and DSM are now closer than at any time since the ICD-8 and DSM-II. Differences are largely based on the differing priorities and uses of the two diagnostic systems and on differing interpretations of the evidence. Substantively divergent approaches allow for empirical comparisons of validity and utility and can contribute to advances in the field.

Psychometric Properties of the Independent 36-Item PID5BF+M for ICD-11 in the Czech-Speaking Community Sample

Background: Empirical soundness and international robustness of the PID5BF+M, a shortened version of the PID-5 developed for simultaneous evaluation of maladaptive personality traits in the DSM-5 AMPD and ICD-11 models for personality disorders, was recently confirmed in 16 samples from different countries. Because the modified PID5BF+ scale (36 items) was extracted from the complete 220-item PID-5, an independent evaluation of psychometric properties of a stand-alone PID5BF+M is still missing. Objectives: The present study evaluated the validity and reliability of the 36-item PID5BF+M in comparison with the extracted version from the original PID-5. It also assessed associations between the Borderline Pattern qualifier and trait domain qualifiers. Methods: Two non-clinical samples meeting the inclusion criteria were employed in the study. Sample 1 (n = 614) completed the 220-item PID-5; Sample 2 (n = 1,040) completed the independent 36-item PID5BF+M. Participants were from all 14 regions of the Czech Republic. The Borderline Pattern qualifier was evaluated using a shortened IPDEQ screener. Results: The proposed latent structure of the independent PID5BF+M was confirmed, with an exception of the Disinhibition domain. The results confirmed good internal consistency and test-retest reliability of the measure, as well as some support for the measurement invariance of the independent PID5BF+M in comparison with the extracted version from the original PID-5. Significant associations between the Negative affectivity, Disinhibition, and Psychoticism qualifiers and the IPDEQ items for the emotionally unstable personality disorder of both impulsive and borderline types confirmed good predictive validity of the PID5BF+M in pursuing borderline psychopathology within the ICD-11 model. Conclusions: The independent PID5BF+M was found to be a valid and reliable tool for evaluation of the ICD-11 trait model. However, the Disinhibition domain deserves further investigation in clinical samples as well as in international community samples.

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.

How does level of personality functioning inform clinical management and treatment? Implications for ICD-11 classification of personality disorder severity

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The International Classification of Diseases, 11th Edition (ICD-11) classifies personality disturbance according to levels of severity. This article reviews the literature on levels of personality functioning in relation to clinical management and treatment, and proposes how these findings apply to the ICD-11 classification of personality disorders.

RECENT FINDINGS

Findings were primarily derived from studies using the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th Edition (DSM-5) Level of Personality Functioning Scale (LPFS), Kernberg's Level of Personality Organization, and the general P-factor of personality disorder. Severity of personality dysfunction is related to treatment outcome, risk of dropout, therapeutic alliance, readiness for treatment, risk of harm to self or others, risk of dissociation and psychotic-like breaks, coherence in narrative identity, reflective functioning, and epistemic trust.

SUMMARY

The overall level of personality disorder severity indicates risk of negative outcomes and may be used as decision tool for 'personalized medicine' and required treatment intensity (e.g., strength of alliance and the need for establishing epistemic trust). Beyond the ICD-11 guidelines for determining personality disorder severity, these implications also apply to practitioners using comparable frameworks such as the DSM-5 LPFS and Kernberg's Level of Personality Organization. Future research should focus on the interaction of severity with trait qualifiers in relation to clinical management.

Development of a Short and ICD-11 Compatible Measure for DSM-5 Maladaptive Personality Traits Using Ant Colony Optimization Algorithms

While Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders–Fifth edition (DSM-5) Section III and ICD-11 (International Classification of Diseases 11th–Revision) both allow for dimensional assessment of personality pathology, the models differ in the definition of maladaptive traits. In this study, we pursued the goal of developing a short and reliable assessment for maladaptive traits, which is compatible with both models, using the item pool of the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5). To this aim, we applied ant colony optimization algorithms in English- and German-speaking samples comprising a total N of 2,927. This procedure yielded a 34-item measure with a hierarchical latent structure including six maladaptive trait domains and 17 trait facets, the “Personality Inventory for DSM-5, Brief Form Plus” (PID5BF+). While latent structure, reliability, and criterion validity were ascertained in the original and in two separate validation samples (n = 849, n = 493) and the measure was able to discriminate personality disorders from other diagnoses in a clinical subsample, results suggest further modifications for capturing ICD-11 Anankastia.

Personality Disorders in the ICD-11: Spanish Validation of the PiCD and the SASPD in a Mixed Community and Clinical Sample

The International Classification of Diseases–11th revision (ICD-11) classification of personality disorders is the official diagnostic system that is used all over the world, and it has recently been renewed. However, as yet very few data are available on its performance. This study examines the Personality Inventory for ICD-11 (PiCD), which assesses the personality domains of the system, and the Standardized Assessment of Severity of Personality Disorder (SASPD), which determines severity. The Spanish versions of the questionnaires were administered to a community (n = 2,522) and a clinical sample (n = 797). Internal consistency was adequate in the PiCD (α = .75 to .84) but less so in the SASPD (α = .64 and .73). Factor analyses suggested a unidimensional or bidimensional structure for severity, while revealing that the personality trait qualifiers are organized into four factors: negative affectivity, detachment, dissociality, and a bipolar domain of disinhibition–anankastia. The mutual relationships between traits and severity were analyzed, as well as the ability of the whole system to identify clinical subjects. Although further improvements are required, the results generally support the use of the PiCD and the SASPD and help substantiate the new ICD-11 taxonomy that underlies them.

A Bifactor Model of Personality Organization

The aim of this study was to explore the viability of a bifactor model for the Inventory of Personality Organization (IPO), which is a self-report measure of personality functioning based on Kernberg's model of personality organization. A heterogeneous, predominantly clinical sample (N = 616) completed the German 83-item version of the IPO. Confirmatory and Exploratory Factor Analyses were applied to explore the factor structure of the IPO. We were able to establish a bifactor model with a general factor of personality functioning and three specific factors (Aggression, Reality Testing, Moral Values), which represent additional dimensions of personality organization. Virtually all items showed substantial positive loadings on the general factor, explaining roughly 66% of the common variance. Furthermore, we found support for convergent and discriminant validity of general and specific factors with regard to interview-based assessments of personality disorders and personality organization. The results lend support to a bifactor approach to Kernberg's model of personality organization. We also present a 30-item brief form of the IPO that efficiently implements the bifactor approach and may be further validated in future studies.

A Brief but Comprehensive Review of Research on the Alternative DSM-5 Model for Personality Disorders

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Both the Alternative DSM-5 Model for Personality Disorders (AMPD) and the chapter on personality disorders (PD) in the recent version of ICD-11 embody a shift from a categorical to a dimensional paradigm for the classification of PD. We describe these new models, summarize available measures, and provide a comprehensive review of research on the AMPD.

RECENT FINDINGS

A total of 237 publications on severity (criterion A) and maladaptive traits (criterion B) of the AMPD indicate (a) acceptable interrater reliability, (b) largely consistent latent structures, (c) substantial convergence with a range of theoretically and clinically relevant external measures, and (d) some evidence for incremental validity when controlling for categorical PD diagnoses. However, measures of criterion A and B are highly correlated, which poses conceptual challenges. The AMPD has stimulated extensive research with promising findings. We highlight open questions and provide recommendations for future research.

Critical psychiatry is becoming Luddite

The critical psychiatry movement has a part to play in correcting some of the exaggerated claims sometimes made by inveterate optimists in our profession. But it has gone too far in creating increasingly destructive commentaries that add little to knowledge and only serve as a brake on progress.

DECLARATION OF INTEREST

None.