[Perpetrators and victims of intimate partner violence: Personological profiles of people with borderline personality disorder]. / Violence conjugale commise et subie : profils personnologiques de personnes avec un trouble de personnalité limite.

Objective Personality disorders and intimate partner violence (IPV) are two problems recognized as major public health issues associated with serious individual and societal repercussions. Several studies have documented the links between borderline personality disorder (BPD) and IPV; however, we know very little about the specific pathological traits contributing to IPV. The study aims to document the phenomenon of IPV committed and suffered in persons with BPD and to draw profiles from the personality facets of the DSM-5 Alternative Model for Personality Disorders (AMPD). Method One hundred and eight BPD participants (83.3% female; Mage = 32.39, SD = 9.00) referred to a day hospital program following a crisis episode completed a battery of questionnaires including the French versions of the Revised Conflict Tactics Scales, evaluating physical and psychological IPV committed and suffered, and the Personality Inventory for the DSM-5- Faceted Brief Form, evaluating 25 pathological facets of personality. Results Among the participants, 78.7% report having committed psychological IPV, while 68.5% have been victims, which is more than the estimates published by the World Health Organization (27%). In addition, 31.5% would have committed physical IPV, while 22.2% would have been victims. IPV appears to be bidirectional since 85.9% of participants who are perpetrators of psychological IPV also report suffering from it and 52.9% of participants who are perpetrators of physical IPV report being also victims. Nonparametric group comparisons indicate that Hostility, Suspiciousness, Duplicity, Risk-Taking, and Irresponsibility facets distinguish physically and psychologically violent participants from nonviolent participants. High results on Hostility, Callousness, Manipulation, and Risk-taking facets characterize participants who are victims of psychological IPV, while an elevation in Hostility, Withdrawal, Avoidance of intimacy, and Risk-taking facets and a low result on the Submission facet distinguish participants who are victims of physical IPV from non-victims. Regression analyzes show that the Hostility facet alone explains a significant variance in the results of IPV perpetrated, while the Irresponsibility facet contributes substantially to the variance of the results of IPV experienced. Conclusion Results show the high prevalence of IPV in a sample of persons with BPD, as well as its bidirectional nature. Beyond the diagnosis of BPD, certain specific facets of the personality (including Hostility and Irresponsability) make it possible to target persons at greater risk of committing and suffering from psychological and physical IPV.

[Psychotherapy prognostic factors for personality disorders (PD) treatment: The role of self-reported questionnaires]. / Facteurs pronostiques à la psychothérapie chez les troubles de la personnalité : implication de questionnaires autorapportés.

Objectives Dropout rates in psychotherapy are known to be high in patients with personality disorders (PD; ranging from 25% and 64% for Borderline PD). Faced with this observation, the Treatment Attrition-Retention Scale for Personality Disorders (TARS-PD; Gamache et coll., 2017) was developed to precisely identify patients with PD at high risk of abandoning therapy based on 15 criteria, regrouped in 5 factors: Pathological Narcissism, Antisocial/Psychopathy, Secondary Gain, Low Motivation, and Cluster A Features. However, we have limited knowledge about the relevance of self-reported questionnaires commonly used with PD patients to establish treatment prognosis. Thus, the purpose of this study is to evaluate the link between such questionnaires and the five factors of the TARS-PD. Method Data was retrospectively retrieved from the clinical files of 174 participants with a PD (including 56% with borderline traits or PD), who were evaluated at the Centre de traitement le Faubourg Saint-Jean and completed the French version of the following questionnaires: Borderline Symptom List (BSL-23), Brief Version of the Pathological Narcissism Inventory (B-PNI), Interpersonal Reactivity Index (IRI), Buss-Perry Aggression Questionnaire (BPAQ), Barratt Impulsiveness Scale (BIS-11), Social Functioning Questionnaire (SFQ), Self and Interpersonal Functioning Scale (SIFS) and Personality Inventory for DSM-5- Faceted Brief Form (PID-5-FBF). The TARS-PD was completed by well-trained psychologists specialized in PD treatment. Descriptive analyses and regression between self-reported questionnaires and the five factors of the TARS-PD as well as its total score were performed to determine which variables from the self-reported questionnaires completed by the individuals contribute most strongly to the statistical prediction of the variables of the TARS-PD rated by the clinicians. Results The subscales that significantly contribute to the Pathological Narcissism factor (adjusted R2=0,12) are: Empathy (SIFS), Impulsivity (negatively; PID-5), and Entitlement Rage (B-PNI). The subscales associated with the Antisociality/Psychopathy factor (adjusted R2=0,24) are Manipulativeness, Submissiveness (negatively), and Callousness from the PID-5, and Empathic Concern (IRI). The scales contributing substantially to the Secondary gains factor (adjusted R2=0,20) are Frequency (SFQ), Anger (negatively; BPAQ), Fantasy (negatively) and Empathic Concern (IRI), Rigid Perfectionism (negatively) and Unusual Beliefs and Experiences (PID-5). Low motivation (adjusted R2=0,10) is significantly explained by Total BSL score (negatively) and Satisfaction (SFQ) subscale. Finally, the subscales significantly associated to Cluster A features (adjusted R2=0,09) are Intimacy (SIFS) and Submissiveness (negatively, PID-5). Conclusion Some scales from self-reported questionnaires demonstrated modest but significant associations with TARS-PD factors. Those scales might be useful in the scoring of the TARS-PD and provide additional information for patients' clinical orientation.

Effectiveness of a 6-Week Day Hospital Treatment for Personality Disorders: Data From a Naturalistic Study.

OBJECTIVE: To report on the effectiveness of a time-limited day-hospital crisis treatment for personality disorders (PDs) in a naturalistic setting. METHOD: Archival data from 260 patients diagnosed with PDs (202 female, 58 male) who completed a 6-week day-hospital treatment program between 2012 and 2015 were analyzed. Treatment was available upon referral by psychiatrists at local emergency rooms and short-term hospitalization units. Pre-post change was assessed using the Outcome Questionnaire (OQ-45.2). RESULTS: Patients significantly improved during treatment on the total OQ-45.2 scale and its 3 subscales. Pre-post changes yielded large effect sizes for the total OQ-45.2 scale and the Symptom Distress subscale, and moderate effect sizes for the Interpersonal Relations and Social Role subscales. Reliable change was observed for 55% of patients for the total scale. Younger patients (18 to 24 y of age) showed larger improvements on social role satisfaction than patients over the age of 30. Overall improvement was larger for patients engaged in social participation at the beginning of treatment. CONCLUSIONS: This study conducted in a naturalistic setting suggests that a time-limited, 6-week day-hospital treatment program tailored to patients wiith PDs may be effective in reducing overall symptomatology in patients experiencing a crisis episode.

Another look inside the gap: ecological contributions to the transmission of attachment in a sample of adolescent mother-infant dyads.

Ecological contributions to attachment transmission were studied in a sample of 64 adolescent mother-infant dyads. Maternal sensitivity was assessed when infants were 6 and 10 months old, and infant security was assessed at 15 and 18 months. Maternal attachment state of mind was measured with the Adult Attachment Interview (AAI) after the 1st assessment. Ecological variables considered were maternal education and depression, paternal support, and infant maternal grandmother support. Results indicated that when the contribution of ecological variables was statistically controlled for, sensitivity was a significant mediator and state of mind no longer contributed to infant security. Sensitivity also mediated an association between maternal education and infant attachment, suggesting that attachment transmission is embedded in a more global process of infant attachment development.