Introduction:The fifth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (American Psychiatric Association, 2013) introduced a dissociative subtype for patients with posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and depersonalization and/or derealization symptoms. Despite high comorbidity rates between PTSD and dissociative disorders (DDs), research has not paid attention to the differentiation or overlap between the dissociative subtype of PTSD and DDs. This raises a question: To what extent do patients with dissociative PTSD differ from patients with PTSD and comorbid DDs? Method: We compared three groups of complex patients with trauma-related disorders and/or personality disorders (n ϭ 150): a dissociative PTSD, a nondissociative PTSD, and a non-PTSD group of patients with mainly personality disorders. We used structured clinical interviews and self-administered questionnaires on dissociative symptoms and disorders, personality disorders, trauma histories, depression, anxiety, and general psychopathology. The Dissociative Experiences Scale (DES; Ն20) and the depersonalization/ derealization subscale of the DES were used for differentiating dissociative PTSD from nondissociative PTSD. Results: Of all patients, 33% met criteria for dissociative PTSD. More than half of the dissociative PTSD patients (54%) met criteria for one or more DDs; using the depersonalization/derealization subscale of the DES, even 66% had a comorbid DD. But also of the non-PTSD patients, 24% had a mean DES score of Ն20. There were no symptomatic differences (e.g., depression and anxiety) between dissociative PTSD with and without comorbid DDs. Conclusion: Overlap between dissociative PTSD and DD is large and we recommend replication of previous studies, using structured clinical assessment of DDs. Clinical Impact StatementThis study suggests that there is substantial overlap between the dissociative subtype of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), which is added to the fifth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, and dissociative disorders. More than half of the patients who were diagnosed with PTSD met the criteria of dissociative PTSD. Furthermore, approximately half of the patients with dissociative PTSD had (also) a dissociative disorder. This suggests that when diagnosing and treating patients with PTSD, clinicians should be aware of co-morbid (symptoms of) dissociative disorders.

Are personality disorders (PDs) associated with emotional neglect? Draijer (2003) developed a dimensional model of trauma-related disorders and PD. The first dimension consists of the severity of the trauma endured. The second dimension consists of emotional neglect, which is assumed to be related primarily to personality pathology. In this article, we investigate whether an association between retrospective reports of emotional neglect and the presence and severity of PD exists. A sample of 150 patients was systematically assessed. Results indicate that there is little evidence to support a link between emotional neglect and problematic personality functioning at the disorder level; however, there might be a link between emotional neglect and problematic personality functioning in a dimensional way. Findings indicate a relationship between lack of parental warmth and problematic personality functioning, supporting the existence of the emotional neglectaxis of the proposed model in a dimensional framework of viewing personality pathology.

Background: There is substantial comorbidity between trauma-related disorders (TRDs), dissociative disorders (DDs) and personality disorders (PDs), especially in patients who report childhood trauma and emotional neglect. However, little is known about the course of these comorbid disorders, despite the fact that this could be of great clinical importance in guiding treatment.Objective: This study describes the two-year course of a cohort of patients with (comorbid) TRDs, DDs and PDs and aims to identify possible predictors of course. Possible gender differences will be described, as well as features of non-respondents. Method: Patients (N = 150) referred to either a trauma treatment program or a PD treatment program were assessed using five structured clinical interviews for diagnosing TRDs, DDs, PDs and trauma histories. Three self-report questionnaires were used to assess general psychopathology, dissociative symptoms and personality pathology in a more dimensional way. Data on demographics and received treatment were obtained using psychiatric records. We described the cohort after a two-year follow-up and used t-tests or chi-square to test possible differences between respondents and non-respondents and between women and men. We used regression analysis to identify possible course predictors. Results: A total of 85 (56.7%) of the original 150 patients participated in the follow-up measurement. Female respondents reported more sexual abuse than female nonrespondents. Six patients (4.0%; all women) died because of suicide. Levels of psychopathology significantly declined during the follow-up period, but only among women. Gender was the only significant predictor of change. Conclusions: Comorbidity between TRDs, DDs and PDs was more the rule than the exception, pleading for a more dimensional and integrative view on pathology following childhood trauma and emotional neglect. Courses significantly differed between men and women, advocating more attention to gender in treatment and future research.

BackgroundTrauma-related disorders and personality disorders are prevalent in survivors of chronic childhood trauma and neglect. Both conditions have serious consequences for patients, their families, society and public health and a high risk of development of chronicity. However, information on the long term course trajectories is lacking and predictors of course outcome in survivors of chronic childhood traumatization are unknown. The first aim of the current study is to identify two-year course trajectories of pathology in patients with trauma-related disorders and personality disorders. The second aim is to examine predictors of the course, including demographics, clinical characteristics and comorbidities.Methods/designThe study is a naturalistic two-year follow-up of 150 patients consecutively admitted to the trauma treatment program and the personality disorder treatment program respectively at GGZ Friesland, a regular Dutch mental health care center. The only exclusion criterion is insufficient mastery of the Dutch language. Participants will be assessed after 2 years of treatment through measures that have been completed at baseline, including structured clinical interviews to measure childhood histories of trauma and neglect, (symptoms of) trauma-related disorders and personality disorders, and psychological questionnaire measures (e.g., general psychopathology, depressive symptoms and personality features). In addition, participants will complete an evaluation questionnaire to assess medication prescribed and treatment (s) received outside GGZ Friesland between baseline and follow-up. Information about (psychological and pharmacological) treatment received at GGZ Friesland during the follow-up period will be collected from patient files.DiscussionThis study provides insight in the two-year course of (comorbid) trauma-related disorders and personality disorders. Identifying predictors of the course of trauma-related and personality disorders will allow to differentiate clinical profiles and will offer indicators for treatment.

Objective: Profiling patients who report early childhood trauma and emotional neglect may be useful for treatment planning. This study attempts to quantify a two-dimensional “trauma-neglect model” (Draijer, 2003) proposed to distinguish clinical profiles in terms of trauma-related, dissociative, and personality pathology. Method: A sample of patients referred to a trauma program (n = 49) and a personality disorders program (n = 101) was extensively assessed. Cluster analysis was used to discriminate patients in terms of “psychiatric disease burden,” based on symptom severity scores, type of disorder, and level of maladaptive personality functioning. Clusters that differed in psychiatric disease burden were mapped in the trauma-neglect space and their positions were evaluated. Results: We found three clusters and labeled them as “mildly impaired” (26% of patients), “moderately impaired” (43% of patients), and “severely impaired” (31% of patients). The mean scores on trauma and neglect for the mild and severe groups differed significantly. Conclusions: These findings indicate that further investigation of the validity of the model, which may be used to plan treatment, is useful. Patients experiencing a wide range of trauma-related disorders, dissociative disorders (DD), and personality disorders (PD), combined with a high level of psychiatric symptoms and a maladaptive style of personality functioning, report a range of traumatic experiences in combination with a lack of maternal care, and can be profiled as “severely impaired.”