Suppr超能文献

冲动性严重程度、精神疾病发病率、功能失调性防御与人格障碍之间的临床关联:与轴I障碍的比较研究

Clinical Associations Between Severity of Impulsivity, Psychiatric Morbidity, Dysfunctional Defences and Personality Disorder: A Comparative Study With Axis-I Disorders.

作者信息

Chiesa Marco, Atti Anna Rita, Licitra Manuela, Alberti Siegfried, Epifani Andrea, Gilmozzi Rebecca, Pozzi Euro

机构信息

University College London, UK.

University of Bologna, Italy

出版信息

Clin Neuropsychiatry. 2020 Dec;17(6):339-348. doi: 10.36131/cnfioritieditore20200603.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

Psychiatric morbidity, impulsive behaviour and use of dysfunctional and maladaptive defences are core features of personality disorder (PD). This study aims to evaluate the significance of the strength of the association between these three core dimensions and PD.

METHOD

Using a cross-sectional design, a sample of co-morbid Axis-I & -II disorders, and a sample of Axis-I disorders with no co-morbid PD were recruited at three general psychiatric mental health resource centres and then compared.PD as dependent variable was analysed both as a categorical and as a dimensional entity using the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV. The Symptoms Checklist 90-R general severity index (GSI), the Barratt Impulsivity Scale (BIS) and the Defense Style Questionnaire (DSQ) were used to measure severity of psychiatric morbidity, impulsivity and defensive style, respectively.

RESULTS

BIS was a highly significant predictor of categorical PD (β = .13, SE = .03, p < .001), but not GSI and DSQ. BIS and GSI significantly predicted PD as a dimensional construct (β = 0.32, SE = .08, t = 4.05, p < 0.001; and β = 5.04, SE = 1.54, t = 3.28, p = 0.002, respectively). The diagnostic efficiency statistics found that BIS had greater sensitivity (.82) and specificity (.79), and overall predictive power (.87) of correctly identifying true positive and true negative PD diagnosis compared to the other two measures.

CONCLUSIONS

BIS may be used in routine clinical practice as a screening measure to identify the presence of PD in complex presentations.

摘要

目的

精神疾病发病率、冲动行为以及功能失调和适应不良防御机制的使用是人格障碍(PD)的核心特征。本研究旨在评估这三个核心维度与人格障碍之间关联强度的意义。

方法

采用横断面设计,在三个普通精神科心理健康资源中心招募了共病轴I和轴II障碍的样本以及无共病PD的轴I障碍样本,然后进行比较。使用《精神疾病诊断与统计手册》第四版(DSM-IV)的结构化临床访谈,将人格障碍作为因变量,分别作为分类实体和维度实体进行分析。症状自评量表90修订版(SCL-90-R)的总体严重程度指数(GSI)、巴拉特冲动性量表(BIS)和防御方式问卷(DSQ)分别用于测量精神疾病发病率、冲动性和防御方式的严重程度。

结果

BIS是分类人格障碍的高度显著预测因子(β = 0.13,标准误 = 0.03,p < 0.001),但GSI和DSQ不是。BIS和GSI分别显著预测了作为维度结构的人格障碍(β = 0.32,标准误 = 0.08,t = 4.05,p < 0.001;β = 5.04,标准误 = 1.54,t = 3.28,p = 0.002)。诊断效率统计发现,与其他两项测量相比,BIS在正确识别真阳性和真阴性人格障碍诊断方面具有更高的敏感性(0.82)、特异性(0.79)和总体预测能力(0.87)。

结论

BIS可在常规临床实践中用作筛查措施,以识别复杂临床表现中人格障碍的存在。

相似文献

本文引用的文献

2
Borderline personality disorder and substance use disorders: an updated review.边缘性人格障碍与物质使用障碍:最新综述
Borderline Personal Disord Emot Dysregul. 2018 Sep 19;5:15. doi: 10.1186/s40479-018-0093-9. eCollection 2018.
3
Comorbidity of personality disorder with intermittent explosive disorder.人格障碍与间歇性爆发性障碍共病。
J Psychiatr Res. 2018 Nov;106:15-21. doi: 10.1016/j.jpsychires.2018.08.013. Epub 2018 Aug 10.
4
Diagnosis and classification of personality disorders: novel approaches.人格障碍的诊断与分类:新方法。
Curr Opin Psychiatry. 2019 Jan;32(1):27-31. doi: 10.1097/YCO.0000000000000461.
7
Can Personality Disorders Be Redefined in Personality Trait Terms?人格障碍能否用人格特质术语重新定义?
Am J Psychiatry. 2018 Jul 1;175(7):590-592. doi: 10.1176/appi.ajp.2018.18040481.
9
Mistrustful and Misunderstood: A Review of Paranoid Personality Disorder.多疑与误解:偏执型人格障碍综述
Curr Behav Neurosci Rep. 2017 Jun;4(2):151-165. doi: 10.1007/s40473-017-0116-7. Epub 2017 May 18.
10
The time has come for dimensional personality disorder diagnosis.进行维度性人格障碍诊断的时候到了。
Personal Ment Health. 2018 Feb;12(1):82-86. doi: 10.1002/pmh.1408. Epub 2017 Dec 11.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验