OBJECTIVE: The authors studied methadone maintenance patients to determine the degree of their impairment in object relations and reality testing and the relationship of such impairment to comorbid axis I and axis II disorders. It was expected that deficits in object relations and, to a lesser degree, reality testing would be exhibited by the group as a whole and that they would be related to the presence of comorbid disorders. METHOD: The self-report Bell Object Relations Reality Testing Inventory was administered to 240 methadone maintenance patients. The subjects were first divided into groups on the basis of number of comorbid axis I disorders and then on the basis of number of comorbid axis II disorders. Finally, the subjects were placed into one of four groups on the basis of the combined presence or absence of axis I and axis II disorders. RESULTS: The methadone patients exhibited some specific impairments in object relations, but not in reality testing. Bell inventory scores did not significantly differ according to the number of comorbid axis I disorders, but they did significantly differ according to number of axis II disorders diagnosed. The scores were poorest for those with axis II disorders only, while subjects with only axis I disorders had scores similar to those with neither axis I nor II disorders. CONCLUSIONS: Comorbid axis II disorders, more than axis I disorders, may be associated with problems in object relations and reality testing in methadone patients.
OBJECTIVE: The authors studied methadone maintenance patients to determine the degree of their impairment in object relations and reality testing and the relationship of such impairment to comorbid axis I and axis II disorders. It was expected that deficits in object relations and, to a lesser degree, reality testing would be exhibited by the group as a whole and that they would be related to the presence of comorbid disorders. METHOD: The self-report Bell Object Relations Reality Testing Inventory was administered to 240 methadone maintenance patients. The subjects were first divided into groups on the basis of number of comorbid axis I disorders and then on the basis of number of comorbid axis II disorders. Finally, the subjects were placed into one of four groups on the basis of the combined presence or absence of axis I and axis II disorders. RESULTS: The methadonepatients exhibited some specific impairments in object relations, but not in reality testing. Bell inventory scores did not significantly differ according to the number of comorbid axis I disorders, but they did significantly differ according to number of axis II disorders diagnosed. The scores were poorest for those with axis II disorders only, while subjects with only axis I disorders had scores similar to those with neither axis I nor II disorders. CONCLUSIONS: Comorbid axis II disorders, more than axis I disorders, may be associated with problems in object relations and reality testing in methadonepatients.