Skills training as an adjunctive treatment for personality disorders

Dialectical behavior therapy skills use and emotion dysregulation in personality disorders and psychopathy: a community self-report study

BACKGROUND

Emotion dysregulation is a critical transdiagnostic mental health problem that needs to be further examined in personality disorders (PDs). The current study examined dialectical behavior therapy (DBT) skills use, emotion dysregulation, and dysfunctional coping among adults who endorsed symptoms of cluster B PDs and psychopathy. We hypothesized that skills taught in DBT and emotion dysregulation are useful for adults with PDs other than borderline personality disorder (BPD).

METHODS

Using a self-report questionnaire, we examined these constructs in three groups of community adults: those who reported symptoms consistent with borderline personality disorder (BPD; N = 29), those who reported symptoms consistent with any other cluster B PD (N = 22), and those with no reported cluster B PD symptoms (N = 77) as measured by the Personality Diagnostic Questionnaire-4 + .

RESULTS

Both PD groups reported higher emotion dysregulation and dysfunctional coping when compared to the no PD group. Only the BPD group had significantly lower DBT skills use. DBT skills use was found to be a significant predictor of cluster B psychopathology but only before accounting for emotion dysregulation. When added to the regression model, emotion dysregulation was found to be a significant predictor of cluster B psychopathology but DBT skills use no longer had a significant effect. Across all groups, DBT skills use deficits and maladaptive coping, but not emotion dysregulation, predicted different facets of psychopathy.

CONCLUSION

Emotion dysregulation and use of maladaptive coping are problems in cluster B PDs, outside of BPD, but not in psychopathy. Inability to use DBT skills may be unique to BPD. Because this study relied exclusively on self-report, this data is preliminary and warrants further investigation.

Paranoid personality disorder

Paranoid personality disorder (PPD) is currently included in DSM-IV's "odd cluster" or "cluster A." In the present article, the authors review available information pertaining to the psychometric properties of PPD, as derived from the relevant literature and from databases of personality disorder study groups. There is comparatively little published evidence for the reliability and validity of PPD, and researchers by and large have tended not to study the disorder, either because of investigators' difficulty recruiting individuals with PPD into research studies, or (as seems more likely) because the trait-paranoia from which many psychiatric patients suffer has seemed better explained by other DSM-IV disorders on Axis I and/or Axis II than by PPD. Given the scant empirical evidence on PPD, it seems reasonable to remove it as an independent diagnosis from the next edition of DSM, and instead to encourage clinicians to code trait-paranoia using a dimensional approach.

Brief psychoeducation for people with personality disorder: a pilot study

BACKGROUND

The Patients' Charter for Mental Health Services (DOH, 1997) states that a patient is entitled to both know and understand his or her diagnosis. Despite this, personality disordered clients are not always well informed about their disorder. Some will not be told their diagnosis because of concern that to do so would damage the therapeutic alliance.

OBJECTIVE

To test the hypothesis that the therapeutic alliance is not compromised by engaging in a psychoeducation programme that informs about personality disorder.

DESIGN

Pilot study, pre-post design.

METHODS

Eighteen forensic in-patients and 16 community out-patients separately participated in a 4-session individual programme that focused on personality, personality disorder, and their own diagnosis. Understanding of these concepts was explored in a brief structured interview. Therapeutic alliance was assessed pre- and post-intervention using the Agnew relationship measure.

RESULTS

For both samples, participation in the intervention resulted in a positive change in four of the five measured components of the therapeutic alliance. This change was rated more strongly by clients than therapists, and reached statistical significance for bond, partnership, and confidence subscales. Participants demonstrated improved knowledge of their disorder following the intervention, and all but one gave positive feedback.

CONCLUSION

These findings support the hypothesis and suggest the therapeutic relationship is not impaired when a diagnosis of personality disorder is imparted using this psychoeducation programme.