scholarly journals Personality Disorders Psychiatric and Psychotherapeutic Practices

2015 ◽  
Vol 2 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Dr. Meghamala. S. Tavaragi ◽  
Mrs. Sushma. C ◽  
Mr. Susheelkumar V. Ronad
Keyword(s):  
Personality Disorder ◽  
Personality Disorders ◽  
Couples Therapy ◽  
Therapy Group ◽  
Psychiatric Patients ◽  
Therapeutic Communities ◽  
Milieu Therapy ◽  
Personality Dysfunction ◽  
History Of Use ◽  
Self Help Groups

Personality disorder is a common and chronic disorder. Its prevalence is estimated between 10 and 20 percent in the general population, this means that at least one in every five to ten individuals in the community has personality disorder. In general, personality disorders are diagnosed in 40–60 percent of psychiatric patients, making them the most frequent of all psychiatric diagnoses. Personality disorders are a class of mental disorders characterized by enduring maladaptive patterns of behavior, cognition and inner experience, exhibited across many contexts and deviating markedly from those accepted by the individual’s culture. There are many different forms (modalities) of treatment used for personality disorders: Individual psychotherapy has been a mainstay of treatment. There are long-term and short-term (brief) forms; Family therapy including couples therapy; Group therapy for personality dysfunction is probably the second most used; Psychological-education may be used as an addition; Self-help groups may provide resources for personality disorders; Psychiatric medications for treating symptoms of personality dysfunction or co-occurring conditions; Milieu therapy, a kind of group-based residential approach, has a history of use in treating personality disorders, including therapeutic communities.

Machiavellianism and personality disorder: their relationship in the mirror of interpersonal attitudes

2014 ◽  
Vol 155 (40) ◽  
pp. 1584-1588
Author(s):  
András Láng
Keyword(s):  
Personality Disorder ◽  
Personality Traits ◽  
Personality Disorders ◽  
Interpersonal Problems ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Callous Unemotional ◽  
Personality Dysfunction ◽  
Medium Strength

Introduction: Social and personality psychologists have described Machiavellianism as a pragmatic, callous-unemotional, exploitative and manipulative attitude towards others. Several former studies linked Machiavellian personality traits and interpersonal problems or personality dysfunction. Aim: The aim of this study was to reveal the connection between Machiavellianism and interpersonal problems that are characteristic of personality disorders. Method: 252 participants (146 females and 106 males, aged 32.46±5.39 years, mean±SD) filled out self-report measures of Machiavellianism and personality disorder related interpersonal problems. Results: There was a medium strength relationships between Machiavellianism and several interpersonal problems. Aggression and ambivalence proved to be significant predictors of Machiavellian personality traits. Conclusions: Results are discussed in relation to the patient–therapist bond. Orv. Hetil., 2014, 155(39), 1584–1588.

Socialization Scores in Psychiatric Patients and Their Implications for the Diagnosis of Personality Disorders

1986 ◽  
Vol 31 (2) ◽  
pp. 138-141 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kevin Standage
Keyword(s):  
Personality Disorder ◽  
Parental Care ◽  
Personality Disorders ◽  
General Hospital ◽  
Clinical Diagnosis ◽  
Psychiatric Patients ◽  
Psychiatric Service ◽  
Strong Association

The distribution scores on the Socialization (So) scale of the California Psychologial Inventory was examined in a series of 83 admissions to a general hospital psychiatric service. The series was divided into groups of low and high scorers (Low So and High So). Low So scorers were younger than high scorers and had a raised mean Neuroticism score. A strong association was found between So scores and the quality of parental care which patients reported receiving from their fathers. Other parental attributes are reported. Patients with a clinical diagnosis of personality disorder were found in the Low So, but not the High So group.

COGNITIVE BEHAVIOUR THERAPY AND ASSERTION TRAINING GROUPS FOR PATIENTS WITH DEPRESSION AND COMORBID PERSONALITY DISORDERS

2000 ◽  
Vol 28 (1) ◽  
pp. 71-85 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jillian Ball ◽  
Brian Kearney ◽  
Kay Wilhelm ◽  
Jodie Dewhurst-Savellis ◽  
Belinda Barton
Keyword(s):  
Personality Disorder ◽  
Personality Disorders ◽  
Depressive Symptomatology ◽  
Therapy Group ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Cognitive Behaviour ◽  
Long Term Follow Up ◽  
Assertion Training

Longitudinal evaluations were conducted on 61 adults who were referred to a Mood Disorders Unit with a history of depression (all index episodes reached criteria for DSM-III-R major depression or dysthymia) and who had completed a cognitive behavioural therapy group either on its own or in combination with an assertion training group. Assessment of personality was made using DSM-III-R Axis II personality disorder categories. These categories were aggregated to form three groups: (i) no personality disorder; (ii) Cluster B (dramatic-erratic); and (iii) Cluster C (anxious-fearful), and were used to identify responsiveness to treatment and outcome at long-term follow-up. A battery of self-report measures were administered pretreatment, posttreatment and at long-term follow-up (1–3 years later). Both groups showed significant improvements in mean scores during treatment and these gains were maintained over the follow-up period. However, improvement in those patients without personality disorders was greater at posttreatment and at long-term follow-up, both in level of depressive symptomatology and proportion of cases meeting criteria for recovery. The treatment implications of these results are discussed.

Classification of Personality Disorder

1979 ◽  
Vol 135 (2) ◽  
pp. 163-167 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter Tyrer ◽  
John Alexander
Keyword(s):  
Cluster Analysis ◽  
Factor Analysis ◽  
Personality Disorder ◽  
Personality Disorders ◽  
Psychiatric Patients ◽  
Interview Schedule ◽  
Personality Variables ◽  
Current Classification ◽  
Personality Disordered

SummaryAn interview schedule was used to record the personality traits of 130 psychiatric patients, 65 with a primary clinical diagnosis of personality disorder and 65 with other diagnoses. The results were analysed by factor analysis and three types of cluster analysis. Factor analysis showed a similar structure of personality variables in both groups of patients, supporting the notion that personality disorders differ only in degree from the personalities of other psychiatric patients. Cluster analysis revealed five discrete categories; sociopathic, passive-dependent, anankastic, schizoid and a non-personality-disordered group. Of all the personality-disordered patients 63 per cent fell into the passive-dependent or sociopathic category. The results suggest that the current classification of personality disorder could be simplified.

The Middlesex Hospital Questionnaire: A Validity Study with American Psychiatric Patients

1981 ◽  
Vol 139 (4) ◽  
pp. 336-340 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matig Mavissakalian ◽  
Larry Michelson
Keyword(s):  
Personality Disorder ◽  
Psychiatric Disorder ◽  
Personality Disorders ◽  
Screening Test ◽  
Psychiatric Patients ◽  
Validity Study ◽  
Phobic Disorders ◽  
American Sample ◽  
Middlesex Hospital

SummaryThe Middlesex Hospital Questionnaire (MHQ) was used as a screening test for psychiatric disorder in 169 new outpatients. The profile obtained on the six subscales of the MHQ was strikingly similar in this American sample compared to four previous British reports. The MHQ significantly differentiated between diagnostic groups, most particularly between neuroses and personality disorders. Moreover, 75 per cent of the patients could be correctly classified as either neurosis or personality disorder on the basis of their MHQ total and subscale scores. The MHQ appears to be particularly useful in identifying phobic disorders, and the phobia subscale consistently discriminated between anxiety-phobic states and other diagnostic groups.

scholarly journals Challenges assessing personality disorders with the SCID-5-PD in psychiatric patients

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mateo Boberg ◽  
Simon Felding ◽  
Lennart Bertil Jansson ◽  
Julie Nordgaard
Keyword(s):  
Personality Disorder ◽  
Personality Disorders ◽  
Clinical Diagnosis ◽  
Clinical Assessment ◽  
Psychiatric Patients ◽  
Borderline Personality ◽  
Schizophrenia Spectrum ◽  
Icd 10 ◽  
Schizotypal Disorder ◽  
Diagnostic Outcomes

Abstract Background: The SCID-5-PD is frequently used to diagnose personality disorders. The aim of this study is to compare the diagnostic outcomes of the SCID-5-PD with expert clinical assessment in an ICD-10 setting. Methods: A random sample of a total of 30 psychiatric in- and outpatients (mean age = 34 ± 16, 17 males and 13 females) went through a comprehensive clinical assessment conducted by experts. Subsequently, the patients were assessed with the SCID-5-PD by specifically trained novice raters. Results: 55% (n=11) of patients with clinical diagnosis within the schizophrenia spectrum were allocated one or more diagnoses of personality disorder according to the SCID-5-PD, primarily borderline personality disorder (n=6). In contrast, of all patients with a clinical diagnosis outside the schizophrenia spectrum, only one patient qualified for a diagnosis of personality disorder with the SCID-5-PD. Meanwhile, 70% (n=7) of patients with a clinical diagnosis of ICD-10 schizotypal disorder did not meet the criteria for this disorder when assessed with the SCID-5-PD. Conclusions: When considering a differential diagnosis within the schizophrenia spectrum, outcomes from the SCID-5-PD should be interpreted cautiously.

Reliability of a Schedule for Rating Personality Disorders

1979 ◽  
Vol 135 (2) ◽  
pp. 168-174 ◽  
Author(s):  
P. Tyrer ◽  
M. S. Alexander ◽  
D. Cicchetti ◽  
M. S. Cohen ◽  
Marina Remington
Keyword(s):  
Personality Disorder ◽  
Personality Traits ◽  
Personality Disorders ◽  
Psychiatric Hospital ◽  
Psychiatric Patients ◽  
Initial Study ◽  
Rater Reliability ◽  
Satisfactory Level ◽  
Simplified Form ◽  
Temporal Reliability

SummaryThe inter-situational, inter-rater and temporal reliability of a schedule for rating personality disorders is described. In an initial study with a simplified form of the schedule in patients from different wards of a psychiatric hospital inter-situational reliability between raters was higher for patients with personality disorders than with no personality disorder. Using the full schedule, inter-rater reliability, using audiotaped and separate interviews, and temporal reliability at interviews conducted a mean of 12.5 months apart all reached a satisfactory level, suggesting that the schedule may be a useful instrument for measuring deviant personality traits. The interview may be used with a subject or an informant but agreement between ratings made with informants and psychiatric patients during illness was low, and the schedule is not recommended for use with patients alone during acute episodes of illness.

Assessment of Pathological Traits in DSM-5 Personality Disorders By the DAPP-BQ: How Do These Traits Relate to the Six Personality Disorder Types of the Alternative Model?

2019 ◽  
Vol 33 (1) ◽  
pp. 49-70 ◽  
Author(s):  
Han Berghuis ◽  
Theo J. M. Ingenhoven ◽  
Paul T. van der Heijden ◽  
Gina M. P. Rossi ◽  
Chris K. W. Schotte
Keyword(s):  
Personality Disorder ◽  
Personality Disorders ◽  
Alternative Model ◽  
Psychiatric Patients ◽  
Personality Pathology ◽  
Personality Functioning ◽  
Dsm 5 ◽  
Criterion A ◽  
Dsm Iv ◽  
Dimensional Assessment

The six personality disorder (PD) types in DSM-5 section III are intended to resemble their DSM-IV/DSM-5 section II PD counterparts, but are now described by the level of personality functioning (criterion A) and an assigned trait profile (criterion B). However, concerns have been raised about the validity of these PD types. The present study examined the continuity between the DSM-IV/DSM-5 section II PDs and the corresponding trait profiles of the six DSM-5 section III PDs in a sample of 350 Dutch psychiatric patients. Facets of the Dimensional Assessment of Personality Pathology—Basic Questionnaire (DAPP-BQ) were presumed as representations (proxies) of the DSM-5 section III traits. Correlational patterns between the DAPP-BQ and the six PDs were consistent with previous research between DAPP-BQ and DSM-IV PDs. Moreover, DAPP-BQ proxies were able to predict the six selected PDs. However, the assigned trait profile for each PD didn't fully match the corresponding PD.

DSM‐IV personality disorders and the Five‐Factor Model of personality: a multi‐method examination of domain‐ and facet‐level predictions

2005 ◽  
Vol 19 (4) ◽  
pp. 307-324 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. Michael Bagby ◽  
Paul T. Costa ◽  
Thomas A. Widiger ◽  
Andrew G. Ryder ◽  
Margarita Marshall
Keyword(s):  
Personality Disorder ◽  
Personality Disorders ◽  
Factor Model ◽  
Psychiatric Patients ◽  
Five Factor Model ◽  
Structured Interview ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Neo Personality Inventory ◽  
Personality Functioning ◽  
Personality Psychopathology

The personality disorder classification system (Axis II) in the various versions of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manuals of Mental Disorders (DSM) has been the target of repeated criticism, with conceptual analysis and empirical evidence documenting its flaws. In response, many have proposed alternative approaches for the assessment of personality psychopathology, including the application of the Five‐Factor Model of personality (FFM). Many remain sceptical, however, as to whether domain and facet traits from a model of general personality functioning can be successfully applied to clinical patients with personality disorders (PDs). In this study, with a sample of psychiatric patients (n = 115), personality disorder symptoms corresponding to each of the 10 PDs were successfully predicted by the facet and domain traits of the FFM, as measured by a semi‐structured interview, the Structured Interview for the Five Factor Model (SIFFM; Trull & Widiger, 1997) and a self‐report questionnaire, the Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO PI‐R; Costa and McCrae, 1992). These results provide support for the perspective that personality psychopathology can be captured by general personality dimensions. The FFM has the potential to provide a valid and scientifically sound framework from which to assess personality psychopathology, in a way that covers most of the domains conceptualized in DSM while transcending the limitations of the current categorical approach to these disorders. Copyright © 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Tools & Resources: Impairment and Disability Web Sites

1999 ◽  
Vol 4 (6) ◽  
pp. 5-6
Keyword(s):  
Personality Disorder ◽  
Personality Disorders ◽  
Interpersonal Relationships ◽  
Web Sites ◽  
Outpatient Psychotherapy ◽  
Obsessive Compulsive ◽  
Not Otherwise Specified ◽  
Cluster B Personality Disorders ◽  
Clinically Significant ◽  
And Behavior

Abstract Personality disorders are enduring patterns of inner experience and behavior that deviate markedly from those expected by the individual's culture; these inflexible and pervasive patterns reflect issues with cognition, affectivity, interpersonal functioning and impulse control, and lead to clinically significant distress or impairment in social, occupational, or other important areas of functioning. The AMA Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment, Fourth Edition, defines two specific personality disorders, in addition to an eleventh condition, Personality Disorder Not Otherwise Specified. Cluster A personality disorders include paranoid, schizoid, and schizotypal personalities; of these, Paranoid Personality Disorder probably is most common in the legal arena. Cluster B personality disorders include antisocial, borderline, histrionic, and narcissistic personality. Such people may suffer from frantic efforts to avoid perceived abandonment, patterns of unstable and intense interpersonal relationships, an identity disturbance, and impulsivity. Legal issues that involve individuals with cluster B personality disorders often involve determination of causation of the person's problems, assessment of claims of harassment, and assessment of the person's fitness for employment. Cluster C personality disorders include avoidant, dependent, and obsessive-compulsive personality. Two case histories illustrate some of the complexities of assessing impairment in workers with personality disorders, including drug abuse, hospitalizations, and inpatient and outpatient psychotherapy.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document