Liliana Ferraz

Exploring the interaction between childhood maltreatment and temperamental traits on the severity of borderline personality disorder

BACKGROUND Childhood maltreatment and temperamental traits play a role in the development of Borderline Personality Disorder (BPD). The aim of the present study was to assess the involvement and the interrelationship of both factors in the clinical severity of BPD. METHOD The self-reported history of childhood trauma, psychobiological temperamental traits, and severity of BPD symptoms were evaluated in 130 subjects with BPD. RESULTS Approximately 70% of the sample reported some form of abuse or neglect. Childhood maltreatment inversely correlated with sociability, but no correlation was observed with the other temperamental traits. The regression model showed that neuroticism-anxiety and aggression-hostility traits, as well as emotional abuse, were risk factors independently associated with the severity of BPD. Sexual abuse was not associated with the severity of the disorder. Finally, the interaction between high neuroticism-anxiety traits and the presence of severe emotional abuse was associated with BPD severity. CONCLUSION These results suggest that the interaction between temperamental traits and childhood emotional abuse has an influence not only on the development but also on the severity of BPD. Further studies are needed to identify more biological and environmental factors associated with the severity of the disorder.

Hostility and childhood sexual abuse as predictors of suicidal behaviour in Borderline Personality Disorder

Impulsivity is a multidimensional construct and has been previously associated with suicidal behaviour in borderline personality disorder (BPD). This study examined the associations between suicidal behaviour and impulsivity-related personality traits, as well as history of childhood sexual abuse, in 76 patients diagnosed with BPD using both the Structured Interview for Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders III (DSM-III) Axis-II diagnoses and the self-personality questionnaire. Impulsivity-related traits were measured using the Barratt Impulsiveness Scale-11 (BIS-11), the Buss-Durkee Hostility Inventory (BDHI) and the Temperament and Character Inventory-Revised (TCI-R). We found that hostility and childhood sexual abuse, but not impulsivity or other temperament traits, significantly predicted the presence, number and severity of previous suicide attempts. Hostility traits and childhood sexual abuse showed an impact on suicide attempts in BPD. Our results support previous findings indicating that high levels of hostility and having suffered sexual abuse during childhood lead to an increased risk for suicidal behaviour in BPD.

Social anxiety and negative early life events in university students

INTRODUCTION There is substantial evidence regarding the impact of negative life events during childhood on the aetiology of psychiatric disorders. We examined the association between negative early life events and social anxiety in a sample of 571 Spanish University students. METHODS In a cross-sectional survey conducted in 2007, we collected data through a semistructured questionnaire of sociodemographic variables, personal and family psychiatric history, and substance abuse. We assessed the five early negative life events: (i) the loss of someone close, (ii) emotional abuse, (iii) physical abuse, (iv) family violence, and (v) sexual abuse. All participants completed the Liebowitz Social Anxiety Scale. RESULTS Mean (SD) age was 21 (4.5), 75% female, LSAS score was 40 (DP = 22), 14.2% had a psychiatric family history and 50.6% had negative life events during childhood. Linear regression analyses, after controlling for age, gender, and family psychiatric history, showed a positive association between family violence and social score (p = 0.03). None of the remaining stressors produced a significant increase in LSAS score (p > 0.05). CONCLUSION University students with high levels of social anxiety presented higher prevalence of negative early life events. Thus, childhood family violence could be a risk factor for social anxiety in such a population.

Seven basic dimensions of personality pathology and their clinical consequences: Are all personalities equally harmful?

OBJECTIVES Dimensional pathology models are increasingly being accepted for the assessment of disordered personalities, but their ability to predict negative outcomes is yet to be studied. We examine the relative clinical impact of seven basic dimensions of personality pathology through their associations with a wide range of clinical outcomes. METHODS A sample of 960 outpatients was assessed through a 7-factor model integrating the Cloninger, the Livesley, and the DSM taxonomies. Thirty-six indicators of clinical outcome covering three areas - dissatisfaction, functional difficulties, and clinical severity - were also assessed. The unique contribution of each personality dimension to clinical outcome was estimated through multiple regressions. RESULTS Overall, personality dimensions explained 17.6% of the variance of clinical outcome, but varied substantially in terms of their unique contributions. Negative Emotionality had the greatest impact in all areas, contributing 43.9% of the explained variance. The remaining dimensions led to idiosyncratic patterns of clinical outcomes but had a comparatively minor clinical impact. A certain effect was also found for combinations of dimensions such as Negative Emotionality × Impulsive Sensation Seeking, but most interactions were clinically irrelevant. CONCLUSIONS Our findings suggest that the most relevant dimensions of personality pathology are associated with very different clinical consequences and levels of harmfulness. PRACTITIONER POINTS The relative clinical impact of seven basic dimensions of personality pathology is examined. Negative Emotionality (Neuroticism) is 6-14 times as harmful as other pathological dimensions. The remaining dimensions and their interactions have very specific and comparatively minor clinical consequences. LIMITATIONS We examine only a handful of clinical outcomes. Our results may not be generalizable to other clinical or life outcomes. Our variables are self-reported and hence susceptible to bias. Our design does not allow us to establish causal relationships between personality and clinical outcomes.