OBJECTIVE: This study aims to compare ICD-10 and putative ICD-11 classifications of personality disorder in different clinical populations. DESIGN: Prospective recording of ICD-10 and ICD-11 personality disorder classifications was carried out in (1) an anxious medical population, (2) an acute psychiatric in-patient population and (3) a retrospective recording of a mixed anxiety depression cohort in which all baseline data were scored from baseline information using the ICD-11 classification and compared with the original ICD-10 assessments. METHOD: Comparison of ICD-10 and ICD-11 prevalence of personality disorder in each population was carried out. RESULTS: Data from 722 patients were recorded. Using the ICD-10 criteria, the prevalence of generic personality disorder was 33.8% compared with 40.4% using the ICD-11 ones (χ2 = 6.7; P < 0.01), with 103 (14.3%) discordant assessments. Using the severity definitions in ICD-11, 34.3% of patients had personality difficulty. Severity level varied greatly by population; severe personality disorder was five times more common in the inpatient group. The four domain traits originally denoted as qualifying severity in ICD-11, negative affective, dissocial, anankastic and detached, were linked to anxious, borderline, dissocial, anankastic and schizoid personality disorders in ICD-10. Many patients had pathology in two or more domains. CONCLUSIONS: The ICD-11 classification of personality disorder yields somewhat higher levels of personality dysfunction than ICD-10, possibly because the age range for the onset of diagnosis is now flexible. The range of severity levels make the classification more useful than ICD-10 in clinical practice as it identifies the greater pathology necessary for intervention.
OBJECTIVE: This study aims to compare ICD-10 and putative ICD-11 classifications of personality disorder in different clinical populations. DESIGN: Prospective recording of ICD-10 and ICD-11 personality disorder classifications was carried out in (1) an anxious medical population, (2) an acute psychiatric in-patient population and (3) a retrospective recording of a mixed anxiety depression cohort in which all baseline data were scored from baseline information using the ICD-11 classification and compared with the original ICD-10 assessments. METHOD: Comparison of ICD-10 and ICD-11 prevalence of personality disorder in each population was carried out. RESULTS: Data from 722 patients were recorded. Using the ICD-10 criteria, the prevalence of generic personality disorder was 33.8% compared with 40.4% using the ICD-11 ones (χ2 = 6.7; P < 0.01), with 103 (14.3%) discordant assessments. Using the severity definitions in ICD-11, 34.3% of patients had personality difficulty. Severity level varied greatly by population; severe personality disorder was five times more common in the inpatient group. The four domain traits originally denoted as qualifying severity in ICD-11, negative affective, dissocial, anankastic and detached, were linked to anxious, borderline, dissocial, anankastic and schizoid personality disorders in ICD-10. Many patients had pathology in two or more domains. CONCLUSIONS: The ICD-11 classification of personality disorder yields somewhat higher levels of personality dysfunction than ICD-10, possibly because the age range for the onset of diagnosis is now flexible. The range of severity levels make the classification more useful than ICD-10 in clinical practice as it identifies the greater pathology necessary for intervention.
Authors: Johannes Zimmermann; André Kerber; Katharina Rek; Christopher J Hopwood; Robert F Krueger Journal: Curr Psychiatry Rep Date: 2019-08-13 Impact factor: 5.285
Authors: Christopher J Hopwood; Roman Kotov; Robert F Krueger; David Watson; Thomas A Widiger; Robert R Althoff; Emily B Ansell; Bo Bach; R Michael Bagby; Mark A Blais; Marina A Bornovalova; Michael Chmielewski; David C Cicero; Christopher Conway; Barbara De Clercq; Filip De Fruyt; Anna R Docherty; Nicholas R Eaton; John F Edens; Miriam K Forbes; Kelsie T Forbush; Michael P Hengartner; Masha Y Ivanova; Daniel Leising; W John Livesley; Mark R Lukowitsky; Donald R Lynam; Kristian E Markon; Joshua D Miller; Leslie C Morey; Stephanie N Mullins-Sweatt; J Hans Ormel; Christopher J Patrick; Aaron L Pincus; Camilo Ruggero; Douglas B Samuel; Martin Sellbom; Tim Slade; Jennifer L Tackett; Katherine M Thomas; Timothy J Trull; David D Vachon; Irwin D Waldman; Monika A Waszczuk; Mark H Waugh; Aidan G C Wright; Mathew M Yalch; David H Zald; Johannes Zimmermann Journal: Personal Ment Health Date: 2017-12-11
Authors: Fernando Gutiérrez; Anton Aluja; José Ruiz; Luis F García; Miguel Gárriz; Alfonso Gutiérrez-Zotes; David Gallardo-Pujol; Maria V Navarro-Haro; Miquel Alabèrnia-Segura; Joan Ignasi Mestre-Pintó; Marta Torrens; Josep M Peri; Bárbara Sureda; Joaquim Soler; Juan Carlos Pascual; Gemma Vall; Natalia Calvo; Marc Ferrer; Joshua R Oltmanns; Thomas A Widiger Journal: Assessment Date: 2020-06-25