Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-568f69f84b-pl66f Total loading time: 0.79 Render date: 2021-09-19T02:26:22.114Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "figures": true, "newCiteModal": false, "newCitedByModal": true, "newEcommerce": true, "newUsageEvents": true }

Diagnosis of personality disorders in learning disability

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2018

Regi Alexander*
Affiliation:
Leicester Frith Hospital, Leicester LE3 9QF, UK
Sherva Cooray
Affiliation:
Parkside NHS Trust, Kingsbury, UK
*Corresponding
Dr Regi Alexander, Leicester Frith Hospital, Mansion House, Groby Road, Leicester LE3 9QF, UK
Rights & Permissions[Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Background

Though contentious, the diagnosis of personality disorders in persons with learning disability is clinically relevant because it affects many aspects of management.

Aims

To examine published literature on the diagnosis of personality disorders in learning disability.

Method

Selective review with computerised (Medline, Embase and PsychInfo) and manual literature searches.

Results

The variation in the cooccurrence of personality disorder in learning disability, with prevalence ranging from less than 1% to 91% in a community setting and 22% to 92% in hospital settings, is very great and too large to be explained by real differences.

Conclusions

The diagnosis of personality disorders in learning disability is complex and difficult, particularly in those with severe disability Developing consensus diagnostic criteria, specific for various developmental levels, is one way forward. Such criteria may need to include objective proxy measures such as behavioural observations and informant accounts.

Type
Papers
Copyright
Copyright © Royal College of Psychiatrists, 2003 

The diagnosis of personality disorders is fraught with methodological, clinical and ethical controversies (Reference Tyrer, Casey and FergusonTyrer et al, 1993). Although these difficulties are more evident in the context of learning disability, their diagnosis is still significant because it may affect the patient's acceptance into community placements (Reference Reid and BallingerReid & Ballinger, 1987), predict subsequent psychiatric disorders (Reference Goldberg, Gitta and PuddephattGoldberg et al, 1995), determine the rate of referrals to psychiatric services (Reference Khan, Cowan and RoyKhan et al, 1997) and significantly influence the mode of management (Reference Hurley and SovnerHurley & Sovner, 1995; Reference MavromatisMavromatis, 2000; Reference WilsonWilson, 2001). This selective review will examine published literature on the diagnosis of personality disorders in learning disability.

METHOD

Selective review with computerised (Medline, Embase and PsychInfo) and manual literature searches of the past 30 years.

RESULTS

Problems in diagnosis

The key themes are listed below.

  1. (a) In those with average ability, lasting personality characteristics develop by adolescence. However, the developmental phase for personality characteristics among people with learning disability should be longer (Royal College of Psychiatrists, 2001).

  2. (b) Communication problems, physical, sensory and behavioural disorders associated with learning disability affect the ability to diagnose a personality disorder (Reference Khan, Cowan and RoyKhan et al, 1997). The diagnosis of personality disorders often requires subjective information about thoughts and emotions, difficult to elicit in those with severe degrees of learning disability. Consequently, a particular pattern of behaviour diagnosed as ‘personality disorder’ in those with mild or moderate learning disability may be perceived as ‘behavioural disorder’ in those with severe or profound disability.

  3. (c) The criteria for several personality disorders assume a level of cognitive ability which may be absent in those with learning disability. Dissocial (Reference Goldberg, Gitta and PuddephattGoldberg et al, 1995) and paranoid personality disorders are examples. Difficulties in establishing concepts such as ‘preoccupation with unsubstantiated, conspiratorial explanations of events either immediate to the patient or in the world at large’ in a group with significant cognitive limitations are self-evident.

  4. (d) Further problems include the lack of valid, reliable instruments (Reference Khan, Cowan and RoyKhan et al, 1997), differences between ICD-10 (World Health Organization, 1992) and DSM—IV (American Psychiatric Association, 1994), confusion of definition and different personality theories (Reference Goldberg, Gitta and PuddephattGoldberg et al, 1995) and the difficulty in distinguishing personality disorders from late effects of childhood psychosis (Reference Corbett, James and SnaithCorbett, 1979).

  5. (e) People with learning disability often display behaviours that overlap with features of some personality disorders.

Schizoid/anancastic personality disorder

Earlier studies (Reference CraftCraft, 1959) suggested that schizoid personalities were very common in people with learning disability. A significant proportion of these may actually have had autism (Reference Deb and HunterDeb & Hunter, 1991). Autistic traits also overlap significantly with features of anancastic personality disorder.

Emotionally unstable (borderline) personality disorder

Features of borderline personality disorder, such as self-injurious behaviour, impulsivity and affective lability, occur commonly in learning disability (Reference MavromatisMavromatis, 2000). Consequently, additional features should be sought before making this diagnosis (Reference WilsonWilson, 2001). Affective disorders commonly found in learning disability also mimic features of emotionally unstable personalities (Reference Deb and HunterDeb & Hunter, 1991).

Dependent and anxious/avoidant personality disorder

The presence of realistic dependency needs (Reference Reid and BallingerReid & Ballinger, 1987) means that several criteria underpinning the diagnosis of dependent and anxious/avoidant personality disorders may be difficult to apply in learning disability.

The ability to diagnose personality disorders, inclusive of all sub-categories across the whole spectrum of learning disability, is hence debatable. Reviews of the published research literature fail to provide conclusive evidence.

Assessment/research instruments used

Instruments used in studies of personality disorders in learning disability are described below.

Structured Assessment of Personality (SAP)

The SAP (Reference Mann, Jenkins and CuttingMann et al, 1981) relies on an informant account to establish a diagnosis of personality disorder (Ballinger & Reid, Reference Ballinger and Reid1987, Reference Ballinger and Reid1988; Reference Reid and BallingerReid & Ballinger, 1987). The presence of three or more durable criteria establishes a personality trait. If this causes significant personal distress, or occupational or social impairment, the diagnosis of personality disorder is made.

Reiss screen and PIMRA

The Reiss screen is a screening tool for the detection of psychopathology in mental retardation (Reference ReissReiss, 1988). For those scoring above a threshold, the Psychopathology Inventory for Mentally Retarded Adults (PIMRA; Reference MatsonMatson, 1988) is administered (a checklist of psychopathological behaviour based on DSM-III).

Temporal-Lobe Personality Behaviour Inventory

This instrument is useful in identifying abnormal personalities specifically associated with epilepsy (Reference Bear and FedioBear & Fedio, 1977).

‘Clinical’ diagnosis - ICD and DSM

Most studies have used ‘clinical’ diagnoses based on either the ICD or DSM systems to identify personality disorders. The standard categories within these classificatory systems have sometimes been augmented with additional items, e.g. Immature and Impulsive (Reference Corbett, James and SnaithCorbett, 1979).

Diagnostic Criteria in Learning Disability (DC-LD)

Adopting a multi-axial, hierarchical approach to diagnosis, the DC-LD is a new system providing operationalised criteria for psychiatric disorders in adults with moderate to profound learning disabilities (Royal College of Psychiatrists, 2001). The key points regarding personality disorders are summarised below.

  1. (a) The ICD-10 category of organic personality disorder should not be used purely on the grounds that a person has a learning disability, or a learning disabilities syndrome with an associated behavioural phenotype or epilepsy.

  2. (b) A higher age threshold (over 21 years) for diagnosing personality disorders is advised.

  3. (c) The categories of schizoid, dependent and anxious/avoidant personality disorders are not recommended.

  4. (d) The system emphasises that the diagnosis of personality disorders in severe or profound learning disabilities is unlikely.

  5. (e) The problem that these diagnostic criteria have not been primarily designed for use with adults with learning disabilities who offend is noted.

  6. (f) Initial diagnosis using the criteria for Personality Disorder - Unspecified is suggested. If these are met, further sub-classification should be considered.

There are no published studies using the DC-LD criteria for personality disorders.

Studies with data on personality disorders in learning disability

Many of these studies were designed to look not only at personality disorders but also at any form of psychiatric morbidity in learning disability. They vary widely in their methods and findings. The key studies are summarised in Table 1.

Table 1 Studies on personality disorder in learning disability

Study Setting Prevalence Range of learning disability Comments
Corbett (Reference Corbett, James and Snaith1979) Community 25.4% Full, Age 15 years+ • ICD-8 diagnosis
• No differentiation between behavioural and personality disorders
Eaton & Menolascino (Reference Eaton and Menolascino1982) Community 27.1% Full, Age 6-76 years • DSM—III diagnosis
Day (Reference Day1985) Hospital 50.57% (long-stay patients) Full • ICD-9 diagnosis
• No differentiation between behavioural and personality disorders
35.7% (new admissions)
• Personality disorder related to intellectual level (explosive in severe and antisocial in mild)
Gostasson (Reference Gostasson1987) Population survey 3%
Ballinger & Reid (Reference Ballinger and Reid1987) Hospital 22% (personality disorder), 56% (abnormal personality) Mild to moderate • ICD-9 diagnosis, based on SAP
Jacobson (Reference Jacobson1990) Community 5.06% (aged below 21) Full, children and adults • DSM—II diagnosis
3.99% (aged 22+)
Reiss (Reference Reiss1990) Community 25-45% (personality disorder symptoms) Full, Age 12 years+ • Reiss screen and clinical assessment
• Categorical diagnosis not used
Deb & Hunter (Reference Deb and Hunter1991) Hospital and community 36% (hospital), less than 1% (community) Mild to moderate • Comparison of those with and without epilepsy
• Used SAP and T-LPBI
• No differences between the epileptic and non-epileptic groups
Bouras & Drummond (Reference Bouras and Drummond1992) Community 6.9% Subjects with expressive language • DSM—III—R diagnosis
Goldberg et al (Reference Goldberg, Gitta and Puddephatt1995) Community and hospital Abnormal personality - 57% in institutions and 91% in community Full • DSM—III—R diagnosis after Reiss screen and PIMRA
Khan et al (Reference Khan, Cowan and Roy1997) Community 50% (personality abnormalities) 31% (personality disorder) Full • ICD-10 diagnosis based on SAP
Naik et al (Reference Naik, Gangadharan and Alexander2002) Community 7% Mild to moderate • ICD-10 diagnosis after clinical assessment
Alexander et al (Reference Alexander, Piachaud and Odebeyi2002) Hospital 58% Full range • Referrals to a medium secure service in learning disability over a 40-month period
• ICD-10 diagnosis
Flynn et al (Reference Flynn, Matthews and Hollins2002) Hospital 39% (‘severe’ personality disorder), 92% (personality disorder) Mild to moderate • ICD-10 diagnosis based on SAP
• Used criteria to define ‘severe’ personality disorder

DISCUSSION

Most of the earlier studies included patients drawn from the whole range of learning disability and did not distinguish between personality and behavioural disorders. Some suggested that the diagnosis of personality disorders was unrelated to the level of intellectual disability (Reference Corbett, James and SnaithCorbett, 1979; Reference Eaton and MenolascinoEaton & Menolascino, 1982). Others did report a relationship - antisocial personality disorders in those with mild learning disability and explosive personality disorders in those with severe learning disability (Reference DayDay, 1985).

The introduction of the Standardized Assessment of Personality (SAP; Reference Mann, Jenkins and CuttingMann et al, 1981) was a crucial development in research in this area. Although initial studies using this instrument were limited to people with mild and moderate learning disabilities (Reference Reid and BallingerReid & Ballinger, 1987; Reference Deb and HunterDeb & Hunter, 1991), it has subsequently been used across the whole range of intellectual ability (Reference Goldberg, Gitta and PuddephattGoldberg et al, 1995; Reference Khan, Cowan and RoyKhan et al, 1997). Some of these studies revealed exceptionally high prevalence rates of up to 90% for different types of personality disorders in learning disability (Reference Goldberg, Gitta and PuddephattGoldberg et al, 1995).

The ultimate validity of any diagnosis is in its clinical usefulness. Not surprisingly, therefore, unusually high prevalence rates would raise questions regarding the usefulness of such a diagnosis, particularly in those with severe or profound learning disabilities. Indeed, if diagnostic criteria are applied in such a way that an over-whelming majority of those with learning disability satisfy the criteria for personality disorders, it is not of much clinical use, either for the management of the individual patient or the planning of services.

Two recent studies have examined this issue further. In the first (Reference Naik, Gangadharan and AlexanderNaik et al, 2002), those with a clinical diagnosis of personality disorder were identified and ICD-10 (World Health Organization, 1992) criteria applied thereafter. The prevalence rate of 7% in this study may well be an underestimate of the true prevalence, but nevertheless succeeds in identifying a group of patients with specific care needs and resource implications. The second study (Reference Flynn, Matthews and HollinsFlynn et al, 2002), apart from estimating the prevalence rate, examined the diagnostic validity in terms of an association with abusive experiences in early life. The authors also introduce the concept of ‘severe’ personality disorders and suggest criteria for making this diagnosis. This is a novel approach in this field and carries particular significance for the practising clinician.

The diagnosis of personality disorders across the whole spectrum of learning disability is complex and difficult, particularly in those with severe disability. In this context, the need for a personality typology based on the developmental perspective has been highlighted (Reference GostassonGostasson, 1987). Developing consensus diagnostic criteria for each personality disorder, specific for various developmental levels and including objective proxy measures such as behavioural observations and informant accounts is one way forward.

Clinical Implications and Limitations

CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS

  1. Diagnosing personality disorders in those with learning disability is clinically significant, but there are problems with diagnostic clarity.

  2. There is a need for consensus diagnostic criteria which use objective proxy measures and are specific for different developmental levels.

  3. No accurate prevalence figures for personality disorder in learning disability are available.

LIMITATIONS

  1. Because of a paucity of robust evidence-based studies within the field there may be errors in interpretation of data.

  2. There have been differing views on what constitutes personality disorder in learning disability over the past 20 years and this may have accounted for some of the variation found.

  3. The diagnosis of personality disorder in severe learning difficulty is extremely difficult to distinguish from the effects of the disability alone.

Footnotes

Paper presented at the second conference of the British and Irish Group for the Study of Personality Disorders (BIGSPD), University of Leicester, UK, 31 January to 3 February 2001.

Declaration of interest

None.

References

Alexander, R. T. Piachaud, J. Odebeyi, L. et al (2002) Referrals to a forensic service in the psychiatry of learning disability. British Journal of Forensic Practice, 4, 2933.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
American Psychiatric Association (1994) Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, (4th edn) (DSM–IV). Washington, DC: APA.Google Scholar
Ballinger, B. R. & Reid, A. H. (1987) A standardised assessment of personality disorder in mental handicap. British Journal of Psychiatry, 150, 108109.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ballinger, B. R. & Reid, A. H. (1987) (1988) A standardised assessment of personality disorder in mental handicap. British Journal of Psychiatry, 152, 577a.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bear, D. M. & Fedio, P. (1977) Quantitative analysis of interictal behaviour in temporal lobe epilepsy. Archives of Neurology, 34, 454467.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bouras, N. & Drummond, C. (1992) Behaviour and psychiatric disorders of people with mental handicaps living in the community. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 36, 349357.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Corbett, J. A. (1979) Psychiatric morbidity and mental retardation. In Psychiatric Illness and Mental Handicap (eds James, F. E. & Snaith, P.), pp. 1125. London: Gaskell.Google Scholar
Craft, M. (1959) Mental disorder in the defective. American Journal of Mental Deficiency, 63, 829834.Google ScholarPubMed
Day, K. (1985) Psychiatric disorder in the middle-aged and elderly mentally handicapped. British Journal of Psychiatry, 147, 660667.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Deb, S. & Hunter, D. (1991) Psychopathology of people with mental handicap and epilepsy. III: Personality disorder. British Journal of Psychiatry, 159, 830834.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Eaton, L. F. & Menolascino, F. J. (1982) Psychiatric diagnosis in the mentally retarded: types, problems and challenges. American Journal of Psychiatry, 139, 12971303.Google ScholarPubMed
Flynn, A. Matthews, H. & Hollins, S. (2002) Validity of the diagnosis of personality disorder in adults with learning disability and severe behavioural problems: Preliminary study. British Journal of Psychiatry, 180, 543546.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goldberg, B. Gitta, M. Z. & Puddephatt, A. (1995) Personality and trait disturbances in an adult mental retardation population: significance for psychiatric management. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 39, 284294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gostasson, R. (1987) Psychiatric illness among the mildly mentally retarded. Upsala Journal of Medical Science, 44 (suppl), 115124.Google Scholar
Hurley, D. A. & Sovner, R. (1995) Six cases of patients with mental retardation who have anti-social personality disorder. Psychiatric Services, 46, 828831.Google Scholar
Jacobson, J. W. (1990) Do some mental disorders occur less frequently among persons with mental retardation? American Journal of Mental Retardation, 94, 596602.Google ScholarPubMed
Khan, A. Cowan, C. & Roy, A. (1997) Personality disorders in people with learning disabilities, a community survey. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 41, 324330.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Matson, J. L. (1988) Psychopathology Inventory for Mentally Retarded Adults. Orland Park, IL: International Diagnostic Systems.Google Scholar
Mann, A. H. Jenkins, R. Cutting, J. C. et al (1981) The development and use of a standardized assessment of abnormal personality. Psychological Medicine, 11, 839847.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mavromatis, M. (2000) The diagnosis and treatment of borderline personality disorder in persons with developmental disability – 3 case reports. Mental Health Aspects of Developmental Disabilities, 3, 8997.Google Scholar
Naik, B. I. Gangadharan, S. K. & Alexander, R. T. (2002) Personality disorders in learning disability – the clinical experience. British Journal of Developmental Disabilities, 48, 95100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reid, A. H. & Ballinger, B. R. (1987) Personality disorder in mental handicap. Psychological Medicine, 17, 983987.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Reiss, S. (1988) Reiss Screen Test Manual. Orland Park, IL: International Diagnostic Systems.Google Scholar
Reiss, S. (1990) Prevalence of dual diagnosis in community based day programmes in the Chicago metropolitan area. American Journal of Mental Retardation, 94, 578585.Google Scholar
Royal College of Psychiatrists (2001) Diagnostic Criteria in Learning Disability (DC–LD). London: Gaskell.Google Scholar
Tyrer, P. Casey, P. & Ferguson, B. (1993) Personality disorder in perspective. In Personality Disorder Reviewed, pp. 116. London: Gaskell.Google Scholar
Wilson, S. R. (2001) A four stage model for management of borderline personality disorder in people with mental retardation. Mental Health Aspects of Developmental Disabilities, 4, 6876.Google Scholar
World Health Organization (1992) Tenth Revision of the International Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems (ICD–10). Geneva: WHO.Google Scholar
Figure 0

Table 1 Studies on personality disorder in learning disability

Submit a response

eLetters

No eLetters have been published for this article.
You have Access
65
Cited by

Send article to Kindle

To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Diagnosis of personality disorders in learning disability
Available formats
×

Send article to Dropbox

To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

Diagnosis of personality disorders in learning disability
Available formats
×

Send article to Google Drive

To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

Diagnosis of personality disorders in learning disability
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *