Psicothema was founded in Asturias (northern Spain) in 1989, and is published jointly by the Psychology Faculty of the University of Oviedo and the Psychological Association of the Principality of Asturias (Colegio Oficial de Psicología del Principado de Asturias).
We currently publish four issues per year, which accounts for some 100 articles annually. We admit work from both the basic and applied research fields, and from all areas of Psychology, all manuscripts being anonymously reviewed prior to publication.
Psicothema, 2012. Vol. Vol. 24 (nº 4). 523-528
Óscar Andión1,2, Marc Ferrer1,2, Andrea Di Genova1, Natalia Calvo1,2, Beatriz Gancedo1, Josep Matalí3, Sergi Valero1, Rafael Torrubia2 and Miguel Casas1,2
1 Servicio de Psiquiatría, Hospital Universitari Vall d’Hebrón (CIBERSAM),
2 Departamento de Psiquiatría y Medicina Legal, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona and
3 Servicio de Psiquiatría, Hospital Sant Joan de Déu
This study assesses whether patients diagnosed with Borderline Personality Disorder (BPD) according to the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV Axis II Disorders (SCID-II) or the Revised Diagnostic Interview for Borderlines (DIB-R) present differences in factors associated with risk of poor outcome. Three hundred fifty-two patients were evaluated with SCID-II and DIB-R. Patients diagnosed as BPD according to one or both instruments were compared in BPD poor outcome risk factors. The analysis was conducted on the participants who were assigned to SCID-II (n = 135) and SCID-II/DIB-R (n = 126) groups. The group diagnosed with BPD according the combined SCID-II/DIB-R interview showed a significantly greater association with risk of poor outcome predictors, such as total number of comorbid Axis II disorders, number of BPD criteria, presence of comorbid paranoid personality disorder, and worse occupational status. No differences between groups were found in the affective instability BPD criterion, self-reported impulsivity, post-traumatic stress disorder, major depressive disorder or presence of any cluster C comorbidity. The observed differences were large enough to advise caution in generalizing findings from studies without considering what measurement was used for the BPD diagnosis.
Entrevistas SCID-II y DIB-R: asociación del diagnóstico de Trastorno Límite de la Personalidad con factores de riesgo de mal pronóstico. En el presente estudio se compara si existen diferencias en factores relacionados con mal pronóstico en pacientes diagnosticados de Trastorno Límite de Personalidad (TLP) en función de si cumplían los criterios diagnósticos para el trastorno según la Entrevista Clínica Estructurada para los Trastornos de Personalidad del Eje II del DSM-IV (SCID-II) o la Entrevista Diagnóstica para el Trastorno Límite – revisada (DIB-R). Se evaluó una muestra de 352 pacientes mediante la SCID-II y la DIB-R. Tras el proceso de evaluación, dos grupos fueron comparados: el grupo SCID-II (n= 135) y el grupo SCID-II/DIB-R (n= 126). Comparado con el grupo SCID-II, el grupo SCID-II/DIB-R presentó de forma significativa más predictores de mala evolución, concretamente número total de trastornos comórbidos del Eje II, número de criterios TLP, presencia de trastorno paranoide de la personalidad comórbido y peor situación laboral. No se observaron diferencias significativas en inestabilidad afectiva, impulsividad autoinformada, trastorno por estrés postraumático, trastorno depresivo mayor o trastornos de personalidad del Cluster C comórbidos. Las diferencias observadas fueron lo suficientemente importantes como para recomendar precaución al generalizar los resultados de aquellos estudios que utilizan uno de los instrumentos a los que usan el otro.
SPANISH
ENGLISH