Is a brief screen for personality disorder clinically useful for the detection of impairment in personality functioning in adolescents?

Personality disorders Pub Date : 2023-05-01 Epub Date: 2022-06-09 DOI:10.1037/per0000583
Madelyn Thomson, Marialuisa Cavelti, Stefan Lerch, Corinna Reichl, Ines Mürner-Lavanchy, Paul Moran, Julian Koenig, Michael Kaess
{"title":"Is a brief screen for personality disorder clinically useful for the detection of impairment in personality functioning in adolescents?","authors":"Madelyn Thomson, Marialuisa Cavelti, Stefan Lerch, Corinna Reichl, Ines Mürner-Lavanchy, Paul Moran, Julian Koenig, Michael Kaess","doi":"10.1037/per0000583","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The Standardized Assessment of Personality-Abbreviated Scale (SAPAS) has been used extensively to screen for personality disorders (PD), including adolescents. Yet, it is unclear how well the SAPAS performs in screening for impairment in personality functioning (IPF), Criterion A of the alternative <i>Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition</i> model for PD (AMPD) in adolescent samples. We examined the performance of the SAPAS in detecting IPF at a diagnostic threshold for PD in the AMPD. A consecutive clinical sample of adolescents in Bern, Switzerland (<i>N</i> = 293), were first administered the SAPAS, then the Semistructured Interview for Personality Functioning <i>Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition</i> (STiP-5.1). A receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis was used to determine the diagnostic accuracy of the SAPAS in relation to the STiP-5.1. ROC regression analyses were conducted to determine if other variables moderated the discriminant performance of the SAPAS. Internal consistency of the SAPAS was low (α = .54) and overall discriminatory accuracy was moderate (area under the curve = .73). The optimum cut-off point was 5, with the best balance of sensitivity and specificity (63.22 and 69.90, respectively), correctly classifying 67.92% of participants. Agreement between the SAPAS and the STiP-5.1 using this cut-off was low (κ = .30). Age yielded statistically significant effects on the discriminant performance of the SAPAS-performance improving among older adolescents. Findings suggest that the SAPAS may not be the optimal method of screening for Criterion A IPF among adolescents in clinical settings but might also be more suited to Criterion B. Our findings call for a developmentally adapted screener for early detection of PD represented by IPF in adolescents. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":74420,"journal":{"name":"Personality disorders","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Personality disorders","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/per0000583","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/6/9 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The Standardized Assessment of Personality-Abbreviated Scale (SAPAS) has been used extensively to screen for personality disorders (PD), including adolescents. Yet, it is unclear how well the SAPAS performs in screening for impairment in personality functioning (IPF), Criterion A of the alternative Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition model for PD (AMPD) in adolescent samples. We examined the performance of the SAPAS in detecting IPF at a diagnostic threshold for PD in the AMPD. A consecutive clinical sample of adolescents in Bern, Switzerland (N = 293), were first administered the SAPAS, then the Semistructured Interview for Personality Functioning Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (STiP-5.1). A receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis was used to determine the diagnostic accuracy of the SAPAS in relation to the STiP-5.1. ROC regression analyses were conducted to determine if other variables moderated the discriminant performance of the SAPAS. Internal consistency of the SAPAS was low (α = .54) and overall discriminatory accuracy was moderate (area under the curve = .73). The optimum cut-off point was 5, with the best balance of sensitivity and specificity (63.22 and 69.90, respectively), correctly classifying 67.92% of participants. Agreement between the SAPAS and the STiP-5.1 using this cut-off was low (κ = .30). Age yielded statistically significant effects on the discriminant performance of the SAPAS-performance improving among older adolescents. Findings suggest that the SAPAS may not be the optimal method of screening for Criterion A IPF among adolescents in clinical settings but might also be more suited to Criterion B. Our findings call for a developmentally adapted screener for early detection of PD represented by IPF in adolescents. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

人格障碍简易筛查对检测青少年人格功能障碍是否有临床帮助?
人格标准化评估简易量表(SAPAS)已被广泛用于筛查包括青少年在内的人格障碍(PD)。然而,目前还不清楚 SAPAS 在青少年样本中筛查人格功能损害(IPF)(《精神障碍诊断与统计手册》第五版人格障碍模型(AMPD)的标准 A)方面的表现如何。我们研究了 SAPAS 在 AMPD PD 诊断阈值下检测 IPF 的性能。我们首先对瑞士伯尔尼的连续临床青少年样本(293人)进行了SAPAS测试,然后进行了《精神障碍诊断与统计手册》第五版(STiP-5.1)的人格功能半结构化访谈。接受者操作特征(ROC)分析用于确定 SAPAS 与 STiP-5.1 的诊断准确性。此外,还进行了ROC回归分析,以确定其他变量是否会调节SAPAS的判别性能。SAPAS 的内部一致性较低(α = .54),总体判别准确性适中(曲线下面积 = .73)。最佳分界点为 5,其灵敏度和特异性(分别为 63.22 和 69.90)达到最佳平衡,可正确对 67.92% 的参与者进行分类。SAPAS 和 STiP-5.1 在使用该分界点时的一致性较低(κ = .30)。年龄对SAPAS的判别能力有显著的统计学影响--在年龄较大的青少年中,SAPAS的判别能力有所提高。研究结果表明,在临床环境中,SAPAS可能不是筛查标准A IPF的最佳方法,但也可能更适用于标准B。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA,保留所有权利)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信