Borderline Personality Disorder (BPD) and Complex Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (CPTSD): A Network Analysis in a Highly Traumatized Clinical Sample.

IF 2.1 3区 医学 Q3 PSYCHIATRY Journal of Personality Disorders Pub Date : 2023-02-01 DOI:10.1521/pedi.2023.37.1.112
Marcin Owczarek, Thanos Karatzias, Eoin McElroy, Philip Hyland, Marylène Cloitre, Leonhard Kratzer, Matthias Knefel, Graeme Grandison, Grace W K Ho, Deborah Morris, Mark Shevlin
{"title":"Borderline Personality Disorder (BPD) and Complex Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (CPTSD): A Network Analysis in a Highly Traumatized Clinical Sample.","authors":"Marcin Owczarek,&nbsp;Thanos Karatzias,&nbsp;Eoin McElroy,&nbsp;Philip Hyland,&nbsp;Marylène Cloitre,&nbsp;Leonhard Kratzer,&nbsp;Matthias Knefel,&nbsp;Graeme Grandison,&nbsp;Grace W K Ho,&nbsp;Deborah Morris,&nbsp;Mark Shevlin","doi":"10.1521/pedi.2023.37.1.112","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Whether complex posttraumatic stress disorder (CPTSD) and borderline personality disorder (BPD) diagnoses differ substantially enough to warrant separate diagnostic classifications has been a subject of controversy for years. To contribute to the nomological network of cumulative evidence, the main goal of the present study was to explore, using network analysis, how the symptoms of ICD-11 PTSD and disturbances in self-organization (DSO) are interconnected with BPD in a clinical sample of polytraumatized individuals <i>(N</i> = 330). Participants completed measures of life events, CPTSD, and BPD. Overall, our study suggests that BPD and CPTSD are largely separated. The bridges between BPD and CPTSD symptom clusters were scarce, with \"Affective Dysregulation\" items being the only items related to BPD. The present study contributes to the growing literature on discriminant validity of CPTSD and supports its distinctiveness from BPD. Implications for treatment are discussed.</p>","PeriodicalId":48175,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Personality Disorders","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Personality Disorders","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1521/pedi.2023.37.1.112","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Whether complex posttraumatic stress disorder (CPTSD) and borderline personality disorder (BPD) diagnoses differ substantially enough to warrant separate diagnostic classifications has been a subject of controversy for years. To contribute to the nomological network of cumulative evidence, the main goal of the present study was to explore, using network analysis, how the symptoms of ICD-11 PTSD and disturbances in self-organization (DSO) are interconnected with BPD in a clinical sample of polytraumatized individuals (N = 330). Participants completed measures of life events, CPTSD, and BPD. Overall, our study suggests that BPD and CPTSD are largely separated. The bridges between BPD and CPTSD symptom clusters were scarce, with "Affective Dysregulation" items being the only items related to BPD. The present study contributes to the growing literature on discriminant validity of CPTSD and supports its distinctiveness from BPD. Implications for treatment are discussed.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
边缘型人格障碍(BPD)和复杂创伤后应激障碍(CPTSD):一个高度创伤临床样本的网络分析。
复杂创伤后应激障碍(CPTSD)和边缘型人格障碍(BPD)的诊断是否存在足够大的差异,以保证单独的诊断分类,这是多年来争议的主题。为了建立一个累积证据的法理学网络,本研究的主要目的是利用网络分析,在多创伤个体(N = 330)的临床样本中,探索ICD-11创伤后应激障碍和自组织障碍(DSO)的症状如何与BPD相互关联。参与者完成了生活事件、CPTSD和BPD的测量。总的来说,我们的研究表明BPD和CPTSD在很大程度上是分开的。BPD和CPTSD症状群之间的联系很少,“情感失调”是唯一与BPD相关的项目。本研究对CPTSD鉴别效度的文献研究做出了贡献,并支持了CPTSD与BPD的区别。讨论了治疗的意义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.20
自引率
4.30%
发文量
31
期刊介绍: The Journal of Personality Disorders has long been the only forum devoted exclusively to the diagnosis and treatment of clinically significant personality disorders. The journal fosters dialogue among researchers and practitioners working from a variety of orientations and approaches. Its international impact is well established, with subscribers in over 30 countries. This multidisciplinary journal regularly features: - Research on normal and pathological personality and development - New methodologies for assessing personality - Etiologies and clinical classifications for personality disorders - Epidemiological studies and outcomes research on diagnostic criteria - Treatment techniques and innovations
期刊最新文献
Comparing the DSM-5 Dimensional Trait and Triarchic Model Conceptions of Psychopathy: An External Validity Analysis. Examining the Validity of the Levels of Personality Functioning Questionnaire for Adolescents Aged 12-18 (LOPF-Q 12-18): A Replication and Extension With a Sample of Lithuanian Adolescents. Exploring the Nexus: Personality Disorders and Their Impact on Violent Extremism, Radicalism, and Activism. Mapping Emotion Regulation Patterns Within the Alternative Model of Personality Disorders Personality Traits. Self-Reported ICD-11 Personality Disorder Severity in Peruvian Adolescents: Structure, Validity, and Tentative Cutoffs.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1