DSM-5 BPD and ICD-11 complex PTSD: Co-occurrence and associated factors among treatment seekers in Hong Kong

IF 3.8 4区 医学 Q1 PSYCHIATRY Asian journal of psychiatry Pub Date : 2024-08-30 DOI:10.1016/j.ajp.2024.104195
Hong Wang Fung , Stanley Kam Ki Lam , Janet Yuen-Ha Wong
{"title":"DSM-5 BPD and ICD-11 complex PTSD: Co-occurrence and associated factors among treatment seekers in Hong Kong","authors":"Hong Wang Fung ,&nbsp;Stanley Kam Ki Lam ,&nbsp;Janet Yuen-Ha Wong","doi":"10.1016/j.ajp.2024.104195","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>There is an ongoing debate regarding whether ICD-11 complex PTSD and DSM-5 borderline personality disorder (BPD) are the same syndrome. Little is known about the extent to which these two conditions overlap and whether they exhibit distinct clinical correlates in Asian cultures. This study examined the co-occurrence of ICD-11 complex PTSD and DSM-5 BPD in a sample of treatment seekers in Hong Kong (N = 220). Participants completed validated self-report measures which assessed if they met the respective diagnostic criteria. In this sample, 30.9 % met the ICD-11 criteria for complex PTSD only, 10.0 % met the DSM-5 criteria for BPD only, and 28.2 % met the criteria for both conditions. Complex PTSD symptoms were most strongly associated with depressive symptoms (β =.347, p &lt;.001) and trauma-related maladaptive beliefs (β =.337, p &lt;.001), while BPD symptoms were most strongly associated with dissociative symptoms (β =.281, p &lt;.001). This study is the first to show that ICD-11 complex PTSD and DSM-5 BPD commonly co-occurred but were not the same construct in the Asian context, and their symptoms were associated with different sets of demographic and clinical factors. Future editions of DSM and ICD should not merge the two conditions into a single diagnosis.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":8543,"journal":{"name":"Asian journal of psychiatry","volume":"101 ","pages":"Article 104195"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Asian journal of psychiatry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1876201824002880","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

There is an ongoing debate regarding whether ICD-11 complex PTSD and DSM-5 borderline personality disorder (BPD) are the same syndrome. Little is known about the extent to which these two conditions overlap and whether they exhibit distinct clinical correlates in Asian cultures. This study examined the co-occurrence of ICD-11 complex PTSD and DSM-5 BPD in a sample of treatment seekers in Hong Kong (N = 220). Participants completed validated self-report measures which assessed if they met the respective diagnostic criteria. In this sample, 30.9 % met the ICD-11 criteria for complex PTSD only, 10.0 % met the DSM-5 criteria for BPD only, and 28.2 % met the criteria for both conditions. Complex PTSD symptoms were most strongly associated with depressive symptoms (β =.347, p <.001) and trauma-related maladaptive beliefs (β =.337, p <.001), while BPD symptoms were most strongly associated with dissociative symptoms (β =.281, p <.001). This study is the first to show that ICD-11 complex PTSD and DSM-5 BPD commonly co-occurred but were not the same construct in the Asian context, and their symptoms were associated with different sets of demographic and clinical factors. Future editions of DSM and ICD should not merge the two conditions into a single diagnosis.

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
DSM-5 BPD 和 ICD-11 复杂创伤后应激障碍:香港寻求治疗者的并发症及相关因素
关于 ICD-11 复杂创伤后应激障碍(PTSD)和 DSM-5 边缘型人格障碍(BPD)是否是同一种综合症的争论一直存在。人们对这两种疾病的重叠程度以及它们在亚洲文化中是否表现出不同的临床相关性知之甚少。本研究调查了香港寻求治疗者样本(N = 220)中 ICD-11 复杂创伤后应激障碍和 DSM-5 BPD 的共存情况。参加者完成了有效的自我报告测量,以评估他们是否符合相应的诊断标准。在这个样本中,30.9%的人只符合 ICD-11 的复杂创伤后应激障碍标准,10.0%的人只符合 DSM-5 的 BPD 标准,28.2%的人同时符合这两种情况的标准。复杂创伤后应激障碍症状与抑郁症状(β =.347,p <.001)和与创伤相关的适应不良信念(β =.337,p <.001)密切相关,而 BPD 症状与分离症状(β =.281,p <.001)密切相关。本研究首次表明,在亚洲背景下,ICD-11 复杂创伤后应激障碍和 DSM-5 严重创伤后应激障碍通常同时存在,但并不是同一概念,而且它们的症状与不同的人口统计学和临床因素相关。未来版本的 DSM 和 ICD 不应将这两种病症合并为单一诊断。
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
Asian journal of psychiatry
Asian journal of psychiatry Medicine-Psychiatry and Mental Health
CiteScore
12.70
自引率
5.30%
发文量
297
审稿时长
35 days
期刊介绍: The Asian Journal of Psychiatry serves as a comprehensive resource for psychiatrists, mental health clinicians, neurologists, physicians, mental health students, and policymakers. Its goal is to facilitate the exchange of research findings and clinical practices between Asia and the global community. The journal focuses on psychiatric research relevant to Asia, covering preclinical, clinical, service system, and policy development topics. It also highlights the socio-cultural diversity of the region in relation to mental health.
期刊最新文献
The effectiveness of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) in patients with catatonia associated with another mental disorder: A systematic review. Enduring conflict: The effects of war trauma on the well-being of Palestinian children. Modulating neuroplasticity through synergistic ketamine and accelerated sequential theta burst stimulation (TBS) for treatment-resistant depression (TRD) – A case report Altered resting-state brain activity of the superior parietal cortex and striatum in major depressive disorder and schizophrenia Reliability and validity study of the Turkish version of the Schizophrenia Cognition Rating Scale (SCoRS-TR)
×
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