XI. STRATEGIES FOR IMPROVING DIABETES CARE D iabetes is a chronic illness that requires continuing medical care and patient self-management education to prevent acute complications and to reduce the risk of long-term complications. Diabetes care is complex and requires that many issues, beyond glycemic control, be addressed. A large body of evidence exists that supports a range of interventions to improve diabetes outcomes. These standards of care are intended to provide clinicians, patients, researchers, payors, and other interested individuals with the components of diabetes care, treatment goals, and tools to evaluate the quality of care. While individual preferences, comorbidities, and other patient factors may require modification of goals, targets that are desirable for most patients with diabetes are provided. These standards are not intended to preclude more extensive evaluation and management of the patient by other specialists as needed. For more detailed information, refer to Bode (Ed.): Medical Management of Type 1 Diabetes (1), Burant (Ed): Medical Management of Type 2 Diabetes (2), and Klingensmith (Ed): Intensive Diabetes Management (3). The recommendations included are diagnostic and therapeutic actions that are known or believed to favorably affect health outcomes of patients with diabetes. A grading system (Table 1), developed by the American Diabetes Association (ADA) and modeled after existing methods, was utilized to clarify and codify the evidence that forms the basis for the recommendations. The level of evidence that supports each recommendation is listed after each recommendation using the letters A, B, C, or E.

Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes

Erik Eriksen is a remarkable individual. He has no college degrees yet is Professor of Human Development at Harvard University. He came to psychology via art, which explains why the reader will find him painting contexts and backgrounds rather than stating dull facts and concepts. He has been a training psychoanalyst for many years as well as a perceptive observer of cultural and social settings and their effect on growing up. This is not just a book on childhood. It is a panorama of our society. Anxiety in young children, apathy in American Indians, confusion in veterans of war, and arrogance in young Nazis are scrutinized under the psychoanalytic magnifying glass. The material is well written and devoid of technical jargon. The theme of the volume is that it is human to have a long childhood which will leave a lifelong residue of emotional immaturity in man. Primitive groups and

Childhood and Society.

Development and validation of a brief screening version of the Childhood Trauma Questionnaire

• The history, rationale, and development of the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-III-R (SCID) is described. The SCID is a semistuctured interview for making the major Axis I DSM-III-R diagnoses. It is administered by a clinician and includes an introductory overview followed by nine modules, seven of which represent the major axis I diagnostic classes. Because of its modular construction, it can be adapted for use in studies in which particular diagnoses are not of interest. Using a decision tree approach, the SCID guides the clinician in testing diagnostic hypotheses as the interview is conducted. The output of the SCID is a record of the presence or absence of each of the disorders being considered, for current episode (past month) and for lifetime occurrence.

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamapsychiatry/articlepdf/495830/archpsyc_49_8_005.pdf

The Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-III-R (SCID). I: History, rationale, and description.

https://science.sciencemag.org/content/sci/5/110/206.full.pdf

The american psychological association.

SeminarBorderline personality disorder

Objective:The purpose of this study was to assess the lifetime rates of occurrence of a full range of DSM-III-R axis I disorders in a group of patients with criteria-defined borderline personality disorder and comparison subjects with other personality disorders. Method:The axis I comorbidity of 504 inpatients with personality disorders was assessed by interviewers who were blind to clinical diagnosis and who used a semistructured research interview of demonstrated reliability.Results:Four new findings emerged from this study. First, anxiety disorders were found to be almost as common among borderline patients (N=379) as mood disorders but far more discriminating from axis II comparison subjects (N=125). Second, posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) was found to be a common but not universal comorbid disorder among borderline patients, a finding inconsistent with the view that borderline personality disorder is actually a form of chronic PTSD. Third, male and female borderline patients were found to differ...

https://ajp.psychiatryonline.org/doi/pdf/10.1176/ajp.155.12.1733

Axis I Comorbidity of Borderline Personality Disorder

Both the interrater and test-retest-retest reliability of axis I and axis II disorders were assessed using the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV Axis I Disorders (SCID-I) and the Diagnostic Interview for DSM-IV Personality Disorders (DIPD-IV). Fair-good median interrater kappa (.40-.75) were found for all axis II disorders diagnosed five times or more, except antisocial personality disorder (1.0). All of the test-retest kappa for axis II disorders, except for narcissistic personality disorder (1.0) and paranoid personality disorder (.39), were also found to be fair-good. Interrater and test-retest dimensional reliability figures for axis II were generally higher than those for their categorical counterparts; most were in the excellent range (> .75). In terms of axis I, excellent median interrater kappa were found for six of the 10 disorders diagnosed five times or more, whereas fair-good median interrater kappa were found for the other four axis I disorders. In general, test-retest reliability figures for axis I disorders were somewhat lower than the interrater reliability figures. Three test-retest kappa were in the excellent range, six were in the fair-good range, and one (for dysthymia) was in the poor range (.35). Taken together, the results of this study suggest that both axis I and axis II disorders can be diagnosed reliably when using appropriate semistructured interviews. They also suggest that the reliability of axis II disorders is roughly equivalent to that reliability found for most axis I disorders.

/pdf/the-collaborative-longitudinal-personality-disorders-study-1qtbzwbh9m.pdf

The Collaborative Longitudinal Personality Disorders Study: reliability of axis I and II diagnoses.

Objective: Utilization of mental health treatment was compared in patients with personality disorders and patients with major depressive disorder without personality disorder. Method: Semistructured interviews were used to assess diagnosis and treatment history of 664 patients in four representative personality disorder groups—schizotypal, borderline, avoidant, and obsessive-compulsive—and in a comparison group of patients with major depressive disorder. Results: Patients with personality disorders had more extensive histories of psychiatric outpatient, inpatient, and psychopharmacologic treatment than patients with major depressive disorder. Compared to the depression group, patients with borderline personality disorder were significantly more likely to have received every type of psychosocial treatment except self-help groups, and patients with obsessive-compulsive personality disorder reported greater utilization of individual psychotherapy. Patients with borderline personality disorder were also more likely to have used antianxiety, antidepressant, and mood stabilizer medications, and those with borderline or schizotypal personality disorder had a greater likelihood of having received antipsychotic medications. Patients with borderline personality disorder had received greater amounts of treatment, except for family/couples therapy and self-help, than the depressed patients and patients with other personality disorders. Conclusions: These results underscore the importance of considering personality disorders in diagnosis and treatment of psychiatric patients. Borderline and schizotypal personality disorder are associated with extensive use of mental health resources, and other, less severe personality disorders may not be addressed sufficiently in treatment planning. More work is needed to determine whether patients with personality disorders are receiving adequate and appropriate mental health treatments.

/pdf/treatment-utilization-by-patients-with-personality-disorders-1jpp4vgk4o.pdf

Treatment utilization by patients with personality disorders

Objective: The purpose of this study was to assess a full range of pathological childhood experiences reported by patients with criteria-defined borderline personality disorder and comparison patients with other personality disorders. Method: The pathological childhood experiences reported by 467 inpatients with personality disorders were assessed by interviewers who used a semistructured research interview and were blind to clinical diagnosis. Results: Of the 358 patients with borderline personality disorder, 91% reported having been abused, and 92% reported having been neglected, before the age of 18. The borderline patients were significantly more likely than the 109 patients with other personality disorders to report having been emotionally and physically abused by a caretaker and sexually abused by a noncaretaker. They were also significantly more likely to report having a caretaker withdraw from them emotionally, treat them inconsistently, deny their thoughts and feelings, place them in the role of a parent, and fail to provide them with needed protection. The borderline patients with a childhood history of sexual abuse were significantly more likely than those without such a history to report having experienced all but one of the types of abuse and neglect studied. When all significant risk factors were considered together, four were found to be significant predictors of a borderline diagnosis: female gender, sexual abuse by a male noncaretaker, emotional denial by a male caretaker, and inconsistent treatment by a female caretaker. Conclusions: The results suggest that sexual abuse is neither necessary nor sufficient for the development of borderline personality disorder and that other childhood experiences, particularly neglect by caretakers of both genders, represent significant risk factors. (Am J Psychiatry 1997; 154:1101‐1106)

/pdf/reported-pathological-childhood-experiences-associated-with-590c5s4g27.pdf

Mary C. Zanarini

Papers

SeminarBorderline personality disorder

Axis I Comorbidity of Borderline Personality Disorder

The Collaborative Longitudinal Personality Disorders Study: reliability of axis I and II diagnoses.

Treatment utilization by patients with personality disorders

Reported pathological childhood experiences associated with the development of borderline personality disorder