The joint structure of DSM-IV Axis I and Axis II disorders

The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (4th ed. [DSM-IV]; American Psychiatric Association, 1994) distinction between clinical disorders on Axis I and personality disorders on Axis II has become increasingly controversial. Although substantial comorbidity between axes has been demonstrated, the structure of the liability factors underlying these two groups of disorders is poorly understood. The aim of this study was to determine the latent factor structure of a broad set of common Axis I disorders and all Axis II personality disorders and thereby to identify clusters of disorders and account for comorbidity within and between axes. Data were collected in Norway, through a population-based interview study (N = 2,794 young adult twins). Axis I and Axis II disorders were assessed with the Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI) and the Structured Interview for DSM-IV Personality (SIDP-IV), respectively. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses were used to investigate the underlying structure of 25 disorders. A four-factor model fit the data well, suggesting a distinction between clinical and personality disorders as well as a distinction between broad groups of internalizing and externalizing disorders. The location of some disorders was not consistent with the DSM-IV classification; antisocial personality disorder belonged primarily to the Axis I externalizing spectrum, dysthymia appeared as a personality disorder, and borderline personality disorder appeared in an interspectral position. The findings have implications for a meta-structure for the DSM.     

Social phobia: Axis I and II correlates

The presence of Axis I and Axis II disorders in 71 social phobic patients was examined. Generalized anxiety disorder was the most common secondary Axis I disorder, followed by simple phobia. Avoidant personality disorder and obsessive-compulsive personality disorder were the most common Axis II diagnoses, and 88% of the sample exhibited features of these 2 personality styles. Subjects with additional Axis I diagnoses were more anxious and depressed than those with no additional Axis I disorder. Social phobics with additional Axis II disorders were more depressed but not more anxious than those with no Axis II diagnosis. Furthermore, those with an additional Axis I disorder had higher scores on measures of neuroticism, interpersonal sensitivity, and agoraphobia. The prevalence and impact of additional Axis I and II disorders on the etiology, maintenance, and treatment outcome for persons with social phobia are discussed.     

Axis I and II comorbidity in adults with ADHD

Ongoing debate over the validity of the attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) construct in adulthood is fueled in part by uncertainty regarding implications of potentially extensive yet incompletely described comorbid Axis I and II psychopathology. Three hundred sixty-three adults ages 18 to 37 completed semistructured clinical interviews; informants were also interviewed, and best estimate diagnoses were obtained. Results were as follows: First, ADHD combined type (ADHD-C) had an excess of externalizing and internalizing Axis I disorders, suggesting a gradient-of-severity relationship between it and ADHD inattentive type (ADHD-I). Second, ADHD-C and ADHD-I did not differ in frequency of Axis II disorders. Third, however, ADHD overall was associated with increased rates of Axis II disorders, compared with rates in non-ADHD control participants, including both Cluster B (primarily borderline personality disorder) and Cluster C disorders. Fourth, ADHD incrementally accounted for clinician-rated global assessment of functioning scores above and beyond comorbid conditions or symptoms on either Axis I or Axis II. Results further inform nosology of ADHD in adults.     

Personality disorder and Axis I psychopathology: the problematic boundary of Axis I and Axis II

The confusion of personality disorders with Axis I disorders can be traced in part to inadequacies of assessment instruments and diagnostic criterion sets. However, it also reflects the absence of adequate conceptualization. If Axis I continues to include early onset, chronic impairments that characterize everyday functioning, then there is unlikely to be a clear or meaningful distinction. Inherent and unique to personality disorders is that they concern a person's sense of self and identity. They are disorders of everyday functioning. Personality disorders have an early onset, characterize everyday functioning, and relate closely to personality functioning evident within the general population; Axis I disorders, in contrast, have an onset throughout adult life, are episodic, and are readily distinguishable from normal personality functioning.     

Stability as a distinction between Axis I and Axis II disorders

Temporal stability has served as a conceptual basis for the distinction between the clinical syndromes of Axis I disorders and the Axis II personality disorders, the latter being viewed as lifelong enduring patterns. However, comparisons of the stability of Axis I and II disorders have been limited. The present review examines findings from three naturalistic longitudinal studies that utilize similar methodology: the Collaborative Longitudinal Personality Disorders Study (CLPS; Gunderson et al., 2000), the Collaborative Depression Study (CDS; Katz & Klerman, 1979), and the Harvard/Brown Anxiety Research Program (HARP; Keller et al., 1994). Using a definition of remission/recovery as having no or minimal symptoms for 8 consecutive weeks, the courses of personality, depressive, and anxiety disorders were compared. Though remission/recovery rate at the 2-year follow-up was highest for mood disorders, the probability of recurrence was also particularly high. Personality disorders, with remission rates higher than the anxiety disorders, appear to be less stable than conceptualized. The anxiety disorders had remarkably low recovery rates even beyond 5 years of prospective follow-up. Factors that may explain these findings, as well as implications for future conceptualization of DSM, are discussed.     

The relation of neediness and Axis II pathology

Neediness, as a maladaptive form of interpersonal dependency, has been implicated in a range of psychopathology, most commonly mood and personality disorders. In light of the literature's sparse and inconsistent findings, Bornstein, Hilsenroth, Padawer, and Fowler (2000) have called for a systematic evaluation of dependency's role across the spectrum of Axis II disorders. The current study of individuals without current or past Axis I diagnoses found that Neediness was significantly related to dimensions of dependent, borderline, and histrionic personality disorders. Implications for the assessment of interpersonal dependency and issues in need of further clarification are highlighted.     

Accurate diagnosis of personality disorders: Some critical factors

Issues pertaining to the accurate diagnosis of personality disorders are discussed from a scientist-practitioner perspective. An attempt is made to distinguish state (Axis I) from trait (Axis II) disorders, and personality (“normal”) from personality disorders (“abnormal”). The reliability and validity of personality disorder diagnoses are explored, and the four criteria for all personality disorder diagnoses are clarified: These criteria are: 1) presence of psychological symptomology, 2) stability over time, 3) consistency across situations, and 4) under-responsiveness to currently available treatments. Also, a distinction is made between categorical and dimensional diagnostic criteria, similar to the distinction between personality type and trait approaches. Recommendations are provided for improving the clinical and empirical work in this area, and implications for treatment are discussed.     

Diagnostic profiles of offenders in substance abuse treatment programs

This study examined the association of Axis I and Axis II disorders among offenders who were in prison-based substance abuse treatment in a national multi-site study. Participants (N = 280) received a psychosocial assessment and a structured diagnostic interview in two separate sessions. Logistic regression models examined the association between lifetime mood and anxiety disorders with two personality disorders, and the relationship of Axis I and Axis II disorders (alone and in combination) to pre-treatment psychosocial functioning. Over two-thirds of the sample met criteria for at least one mental disorder. Borderline personality disorder was strongly associated with having a lifetime mood disorder (odds ratio = 7.5) or lifetime anxiety disorder (odds ratio = 8.7). Individuals with only an Axis II disorder, or who had both Axis I and Axis II disorders, had more severe problems in psychosocial functioning than those without any disorder. Clinical treatment approaches need to address this heterogeneity in diagnostic profiles, symptom severity, and psychosocial functioning.     

Modifications of Treatment Approaches for Axis I Disorders in Patients Who Also Have a Concurrent Axis II Disorder

Personality disorders have been an area of active interest in psychiatry for many years. Mental health professionals have suspected that these disorders retard the treatment of Axis I disorder and a comorbid personality (Axis II) disorder represents a special clinical challenge. This report draws from empirical literature in the field and the experience of the author to provide one possible theoretical framework to use in viewing these patients as well as practical suggestions to improve management of patients with these comorbid conditions.     

Associations in the course of personality disorders and Axis I disorders over time

In this study, the authors examined time-varying associations between schizotypal (STPD), borderline (BPD), avoidant (AVPD), or obsessive-compulsive (OCPD) personality disorders and co-occurring Axis I disorders in 544 adult participants from the Collaborative Longitudinal Personality Disorders Study. The authors tested predictions of specific longitudinal associations derived from a model of crosscutting psychobiological dimensions (L. J. Siever & K. L. Davis, 1991) with participants with the relevant Axis I disorders. The authors assessed participants at baseline and at 6-, 12-, and 24-month follow-up evaluations. BPD showed significant longitudinal associations with major depressive disorder and posttraumatic stress disorder. AVPD was significantly associated with anxiety disorders (specifically social phobia and obsessive-compulsive disorder). Two of the four personality disorders under examination (STPD and OCPD) showed little or no association with Axis I disorders.     

Heterogeneity of borderline personality disorder: do the number of criteria met make a difference?

Many studies have compared the demographic and clinical characteristics of patients with and without borderline personality disorder (BPD), but there is limited knowledge on differences within the population of borderline patients. One potential index of heterogeneity is disorder severity. In the present report from the Rhode Island Methods to Improve Diagnostic Assessment and Services (MIDAS) project, we examined whether the severity of borderline personality disorder, as measured by the number of criteria present, is associated with co-morbidity of Axis I and Axis II diagnoses, as well as demographic factors and psychosocial functioning. Two thousand three hundred psychiatric outpatients were interviewed with the Structured Interview for DSM-IV Personality (SIDP-IV). Approximately ten percent (n = 237) of the patients were diagnosed with BPD, and they were divided into four groups based on the number of DSM-IV criteria met, 5 (n = 89), 6 (n = 70), 7 (n = 46), and 8 or 9 (n = 32). There were greater rates of drug use disorders and comorbid Axis II disorders, as well as a greater number of suicidal gestures, in patients meeting seven or more BPD criteria. There were no significant differences between the groups in the number and specific rates of other co-morbid Axis I disorders, other measures of psychosocial functioning, or demographic correlates. Sub-typing of borderline patients by the number of criteria met provides a limited explanation for heterogeneity within BPD patients.     

Co-occurrence of personality disorders with mood, anxiety, and substance use disorders in a young adult population

The purpose of this study was to determine the co-occurrence of DSM- III-R personality disorders (PDs) with mood, anxiety, and substance use disorders in a young adult population. The members of the Northern Finland 1966 Birth Cohort Project, living in the city of Oulu with an age of 31 years (N = 1,609) were invited to participate in a two-phase field study. The SCID I and II were used as diagnostic instruments. One hundred and seventy-seven out of 321 interviewed subjects met the criteria for mood, anxiety, or substance use disorders. Altogether 72 (41%) of the subjects with an Axis I disorder met the criteria for at least one PD. The weighted co-occurrence rate of any PD varied from 28% for mood disorders to 47% for anxiety disorders. PDs, especially those in Cluster C, are highly associated with Axis I psychiatric disorders in population.     

The construct validity of depressive personality disorder

This study examined the construct validity of depressive personality disorder (DPD: American Psychiatric Association, 1994). Adult psychiatric outpatients (N = 900) underwent comprehensive Axis I and II evaluations and provided data on 4,768 of their 1st-degree relatives. Despite modest overlap, DPD was not redundant with any Axis I or II disorder. Participants with DPD exhibited more Axis I and Axis II comorbidity, and greater psychosocial dysfunction, than participants without DPD. Relatives of participants with DPD had higher rates of mood disorders, alcohol abuse, and antisocial personality. Results are consistent with findings of several other similar investigations. The authors argue that DPD is a valid construct and should be conceptualized as a personality disorder as opposed to a mood disorder.     

Clarifying the convergence between obsessive compulsive personality disorder criteria and obsessive compulsive disorder

In this study we examined the convergence between obsessive-compulsive personality disorder (OCPD) criteria and obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD). Baseline assessments of 629 participants of the Collaborative Longitudinal Personality Disorders Study were used to examine the associations between OCPD criteria and diagnoses of OCD. Three of the eight OCPD criteria--hoarding, perfectionism, and preoccupation with details--were significantly more frequent in subjects with OCD (n = 89) than in subjects without OCD (n = 540). Logistic regressions were used to predict the probability of each OCPD criterion as a function of Axis I diagnoses (OCD, additional anxiety disorders, and major depressive disorder). Associations between OCD and these three OCPD criteria remained significant in the logistic regressions, showing unique associations with OCD and odds ratios ranging from 2.71 to 2.99. In addition, other anxiety disorders and major depressive disorder showed few associations with specific OCPD criteria. This study suggests variability in the strength of the relationships between specific OCPD criteria and OCD. The findings also support a unique relationship between OCPD symptoms and OCD, compared to other anxiety disorders or major depression. Future efforts to explore the link between Axis I and Axis II disorders may be enriched by conducting analyses at the symptom level.     

Interpersonal dependency and personality pathology: variations in Rorschach Oral Dependency scores across Axis II diagnoses

Although several investigations have examined the relationship of Rorschach Oral Dependency (ROD; Masling, Rabie, & Blondheim, 1967) scores to Axis I diagnosis, there has been very little research assessing variations in ROD scores across Axis II personality disorders (PDs). In this study, ROD scores were compared in 5 PD groups (borderline PD inpatients, borderline PD outpatients, avoidant-dependent PD outpatients, narcissistic PD outpatients, and antisocial PD outpatients), and 2 non-PD comparison groups (psychotic disorder inpatients and college students). Borderline PD inpatients had significantly higher ROD scores than borderline PD outpatients, antisocial PD outpatients, and college students; no other between-group differences were found. We discuss implications of these results for research on dependency and Axis II psychopathology and offer suggestions for future studies.     

Prevalence and comorbidity of axis I and axis II disorders among treatment refractory adolescents admitted for specialized psychotherapy

Research shows that approximately half of the adolescents in a clinical setting suffer from a personality disorder (PD). This finding has not yet been replicated in Europe. To test whether this finding also applies to Europe, structured diagnostic interviews for both Axis I and Axis II disorders were used in 257 adolescents who were admitted to a highly specialized mental health setting in The Netherlands. In this study we found that 40.5% of the adolescents were diagnosed with at least one personality disorder. Most adolescents with a personality disorder (78.9%) also suffered from one or more Axis I disorders. These results are comparable to rates found in previous prevalence studies of personality disorders in both adolescents and adults. Our results provide further evidence to support the cross-national generalizability of the diagnosis of PD in adolescents.     

The burden of disease among adolescents with personality pathology: quality of life and costs

In adults, personality disorders are associated with a low quality of life and high societal costs. To explore whether these findings also apply to adolescents, 131 adolescent patients were recruited from a mental health care institute in The Netherlands. Axis I and Axis II disorders were diagnosed using semi-structured interviews. The EuroQol EQ-5D was used to measure quality of life and costs were measured by the Trimbos and Institute for Medical Technology Assessment Questionnaire on Costs Associated with Psychiatric Illness. The mean EQ-5D index value was 0.55. The mean direct medical cost in the year prior to treatment was €14,032 per patient. The co-occurrence of Axis I and Axis II disorders was a significant predictor of a low quality of life. Direct medical costs were higher for the depressive personality disorder. This study shows that the burden of disease among adolescents with personality pathology is high. This high burden provides evidence to suggest that further research and development of (cost-)effective treatment strategies for this population may be worthwhile.     

The prevalence of personality disorders in a Kenyan inpatient sample

DSM-IV Axis I and II comorbidities and the pattern of Axis II diagnoses in patients admitted at Mathari (Psychiatric) Hospital, Nairobi, Kenya are unknown. To determine DSM-IV Axis I and II comorbidities and patterns of Axis II diagnoses in patients admitted at Mathari Hospital. Cross-sectional study on 148 randomly sampled patients. Twenty percent of the patients were confirmed for an Axis II diagnosis. Eighty-seven percent of the Axis II disorders were Cluster B Personality Disorders of various types. Using chi2 tests, significant associations were found between Axis I and II diagnoses and substance use/dependence (p < 0.001; 66.7%), mood disorder (p = 0.002; 46.7%) and schizophrenia (p < 0.001; 23.3%). The prevalence of personality disorders was lower than that reported in psychiatric patients in USA and Europe. The results are likely to be a true reflection of the actual epidemiological situation, but cannot be generalized to outpatient or general populations.     

Gender differences in a clinical sample of patients with borderline personality disorder

The aim of the study was to investigate gender differences and similarities in patients with borderline personality disorder (BPD) with respect to Axis I comorbidity, Axis II comorbidity, general psychopathology (Symptom Checklist 90-Revised), and dimensional personality traits (NEO-Personality-Inventory Revised [NEO-PI-R] and the Dimensional Assessment of Personality Profile Basic questionnaire [DAPP-BQ]). Fifty-seven men and 114 women with BPD were included in the study. Regarding Axis I and II disorders in an exploratory analysis, men with BPD more often fulfilled the diagnostic criteria for binge eating disorder, antisocial personality disorder, narcissistic personality disorder, and conduct disorder in childhood, whereas women had higher frequencies of bulimia nervosa, posttraumatic stress disorder, and panic disorder with agoraphobia. After correcting for multiple tests, only the gender differences in narcissistic and antisocial personality disorder remained significant. In the SCL-90-R profile, no significant gender differences could be identified. In the exploratory analysis of the dimensional personality traits, women showed higher rates on the NEO-PI-R main factors (Neuroticism and Agreeableness) compared to men. In the DAPP-BQ profile, men reached higher sores on the main factor, Dissocial Behavior. When correcting for multiple tests, gender differences still existed for Neuroticism and Dissocial Behavior. Our results argue for gender differences in Axis I and II comorbidity and dimensional personality traits in BPD. However, in general, more similarities than differences were shown in this study.     

Intermittent explosive disorder and other psychiatric comorbidity among court-referred and self-referred aggressive drivers

We assessed possible Axis I and Axis II disorders in two groups of aggressive drivers (n=20, court-referred; n=10, self-referred) and 30 non-aggressive driver controls, using the SCID and SCID-II. Aggressive drivers were more likely than controls to be positive for any Axis I and Axis II disorders. They were also more likely to meet the criteria for Intermittent Explosive Disorder (IED), current or past alcohol or substance abuse or dependence and Antisocial PD and Borderline PD. The self-referred aggressive drivers were more likely than court-referred aggressive drivers to meet the criteria for a current or past Anxiety Disorder. Re-analysis of aggressive driver data on the basis of presence or absence of IED revealed differences only in Axis II disorders: those with IED were more likely to meet the criteria for any Axis II disorder and Antisocial PD.