Livesley W John
Department of Psychiatry, University of British Columbia, Canada.
J Pers Disord. 2007 Apr;21(2):199-224. doi: 10.1521/pedi.2007.21.2.199.
Although empirical evidence strongly supports a dimensional representation of personality disorder, there is strong resistance to dimensional classification due in part to concerns about clinical utility. Acceptance of an evidence-based dimensional classification would be facilitated by information on how such a system would map onto existing diagnoses. With this objective in mind, an integrated framework is proposed that combines categorical and dimensional diagnoses. A two-component classification is adopted that distinguishes between the diagnosis of general personality disorder and the assessment of individual differences in the form the disorder takes. Then, the DSM definition of personality disorders is extended by defining individual disorders as categories of trait dimensions. This makes it possible to develop an integrated classification organized around a set of empirically derived primary traits. Assessments of these traits may then be combined to generate categorical and dimensional diagnoses. It is argued that this approach would introduce an etiological perspective into the classification of personality disorder and improve categorical classification by providing an explicit definition of each diagnosis. The clinical utility of incorporating a dimensional classification is discussed in terms of convenience and acceptability, value in predicting outcomes and treatment planning, and usefulness in organizing and selecting interventions.
尽管实证证据有力地支持人格障碍的维度表征,但由于对临床效用的担忧,人们对维度分类存在强烈抵触。关于这样一个系统如何映射到现有诊断上的信息,将有助于接受基于证据的维度分类。出于这一目的,提出了一个将类别诊断和维度诊断相结合的综合框架。采用了一种双组分分类法,区分一般人格障碍的诊断和该障碍表现形式的个体差异评估。然后,通过将个体障碍定义为特质维度类别,扩展了《精神疾病诊断与统计手册》(DSM)对人格障碍的定义。这使得围绕一组基于实证得出的主要特质构建一个综合分类成为可能。然后,可以将这些特质的评估结果结合起来,生成类别诊断和维度诊断。有人认为,这种方法将在人格障碍分类中引入病因学视角,并通过为每个诊断提供明确的定义来改进类别分类。从便利性和可接受性、预测结果和治疗规划的价值以及组织和选择干预措施的有用性等方面,讨论了纳入维度分类的临床效用。