The Differential Profile of Social Anxiety Disorder (SAD) and Avoidant Personality Disorder (APD) on the Basis of Criterion B of the DSM-5-AMPD in a College Sample

Clinical cut scores for the Persian version of the personality inventory for DSM-5

BACKGROUND

The cut points of psychological tools to diagnose clinical conditions are not universal and depend on the region and prevalence of the disorder. Thus, we aimed to identify the cutoff points of the Persian original version of the personality inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5; 220 items) that would optimally distinguish nonclinical from clinical groups.

METHODS

Both nonclinical (N = 634, 73% female, 34.0 ± 10.8 years) and clinical (N = 454, 29% female, 29.5 ± 7.4 years) samples from the West of Iran participated in the study. Data were analyzed using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) and Youden's index was used to determine the cutoff scores across the PID-5 domains and facets. The means and standard deviations of both the clinical male and female were compared with the nonclinical group using Cohen's d and independent t-tests.

RESULTS

All the PID-5 algorithms and facets significantly distinguished clinical from nonclinical samples with some unique findings for male and female samples. The mean score of all the PID-5 algorithms and facets in the clinical male and female samples were respectively 1.0-2.0 SD and 0.5-1.0 SD above the mean for the nonclinical counterparts. A score higher than 1.5 on ranging from 0 to 3 in each domain or facet indicated clinical status.

CONCLUSION

Raw cutting scores throughout the PID-5 algorithms can be well used to diagnose any pathology of personality and the severity of the disorder in clinical patients. The cut scores provide a useful tool for the clinical use of the original version of PID-5 in Iran.

Improvement of personality functioning among people treated within personality disorder mental health services. A longitudinal, observational study

Objective

Evidence-based personality disorder (PD) treatments are dominated by interventions targeting Borderline PD, although clinical populations characteristically include different PD features and severity. Personality functioning is a new concept intended to capture common features across PDs. This study aimed to investigate longitudinal improvement of personality functioning in a clinical sample assigned to PD treatment.

Method

An observational, large, longitudinal study of patients in PD treatments on specialist mental health service levels (N = 1,051). DSM-5 PDs were systematically assessed on referral. Personality functioning was repeatedly assessed (LPFS-BF-2.0), supplemented by symptom distress (anxiety: PHQ-GAD-7, depression: PHQ-9), and social/occupational activity (WSAS, work/study activity). Statistics were linear mixed models.

Results

Thirty per cent had personality difficulties below PD threshold. Among PDs, 31% had Borderline (BPD), 39% Avoidant (AvPD), 15% not otherwise specified, 15% other PDs, and 24% > one PD. More severe initial LPFS-BF was associated with younger age, presence of PD and increasing number of total PD criteria. Across PD conditions, LPFS-BF, PHQ-9 and GAD-7 improved significantly (overall effect size 0.9). Mean duration of PD treatment was 15 (SD 9) months. Drop-out rates were low (12%). LPFS-BF improvement-rates were higher for BPD. Younger age was moderately associated with slower PHQ-9 improvement. Work/study activity was initially poor, poorer levels associated with AvPD and younger age, and improvement was non-significant across PD conditions. AvPD was associated with slower WSAS improvement-rates.

Conclusion

Personality functioning improved across PD conditions. The results highlight BPD improvements. The study points to challenges concerning AvPD treatment, poor occupational activity and age-related differences.

The maladaptive domains according to the alternative model of personality disorders (AMPD) criterion B in patients with affective disorders and temperamental triads related to these domains: two unique profiles

OBJECTIVES

The study aimed to (i) compare the maladaptive domains and facets according to the Alternative Model of Personality Disorders (AMPD) Criterion B in patients with a type II bipolar disorder (BD-II) or major depressive disorder (MDD) with healthy controls (HCs), and (ii) investigating the relationship between affective temperaments and these domains and facets in the total sample.

METHODS

Outpatients diagnosed with current BD-II (n = 37; female 62.2%) or MDD (n = 17; female 82.4%) based on the fifth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5) criteria and community HCs (n = 177; female 62.1%) in Kermanshah from July to October 2020 included this case-control study. All participants completed the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5), the Temperament Evaluation of Memphis, Pisa, Paris, and San Diego Autoquestionnaire (TEMPS-A), and the second version of the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI-II). Data were analyzed using analysis of variance (ANOVA), Pearson correlation, and multiple regression.

RESULTS

The score of patients with BD-II in all five domains and those with MDD in three domains including negative affectivity, detachment, and disinhibition are significantly higher than the HCs (p < 0.05). Depressive temperament (related to negative affectivity, detachment, and disinhibition) and cyclothymic temperament (related to antagonism and psychoticism) were the most important correlates of the maladaptive domains.

CONCLUSIONS

Two unique profiles are proposed, including three domains of negative affectivity, detachment, and disinhibition associated with the depressive temperament for MDD, and two domains of antagonism and psychoticism related to cyclothymic temperament for BD-II.

Comparison of the relative sensitivity of two dimensional personality models to the psychopathological symptoms: the section III DSM-5 maladaptive traits versus affective temperaments

BACKGROUND

The Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5) and Temperament Evaluation of Memphis, Pisa, Paris, and San Diego Autoquestionnaire (TEMPS-A) are tools designed for personality dispositions for mental health symptoms. The present study was conducted to compare these models in terms of their relative sensitivity to the symptoms of personality disorders (PDs) and non-personality disorders (NPDs).

METHODS

Subjects in this cross-sectional study were 1232 (805 female; 63.5%) community samples in western Iran. Data were collected using the PID-5, the TEMPS-A, the Symptom Checklist-90 (SCL-90-R), and the Personality Diagnostic Questionnaire (PDQ-4). Correlations and Regression models were used to examine associations between traits and symptoms.

RESULTS

Maladaptive traits assessed by the PID-5 were more strongly associated with PD symptoms, whereas affective temperaments measured by the TEMPS-A were more strongly associated with NPD symptoms.

CONCLUSION

The present findings highlighted the practical utility of both the PID-5 and TEMPS-A indicating risk for psychopathology, but also suggest a distinction between PDs and NPDs in terms of underlying personality dispositions.