Ongoing debate
Starting around the 1980s, the DSM listed personality disorders under the No. 2 Axis, which is for conditions with symptoms that are “not mitigatable,” said Dr. Nelson.
“It really started as well-meaning therapists who care about their patients who wanted to develop some precision in understanding people, and them starting to notice some patterns that can get in the way of optimal function,” she said in an interview.
The thought was not to disclose these diagnoses “because that was for you to understand, and for the patient to discover these patterns over time in the course of your work together,” Dr. Nelson added.
Although treatment for BPD used to be virtually nonexistent, there is now hope – especially with dialectic-behavior therapy (DBT), which uses mindfulness to teach patients how to control emotions and improve relationships.
According to the National Education Alliance for BPD, other useful treatments include mentalization-based therapy, transference-focused therapy, and “good psychiatric management.” Although there are currently no approved medications for BPD, some drugs are used to treat comorbid conditions such as depression or anxiety.
“We now know that people recover, and the whole paradigm has been turned on its head,” Dr. Nelson said. For example, “we no longer categorize these things as treatable or untreatable, which was a very positive move.”
So why is the field still debating the issue of diagnosis disclosure?
“To this day there are different psychiatrists and some medical school curricula that continue to teach that personality disorders are long-term, fixed, and nontreatable – and that it’s kind of disparaging to give this kind of diagnosis to a patient,” Dr. Nelson said.
Dr. Nelson, also the vice chair for education at the University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, medical school, reported that there “we acknowledge BPD’s painful history and that there are these misconceptions. They’re going to be on the front line of combating discrimination and the idea that if you see a patient with possible BPD coming you should run. That’s just unacceptable.”
Dr. Nelson noted that the idea of disclosing a BPD diagnosis is less controversial now than in the past, but “the whole thing is still under debate, and treatment guidelines [on BPD] are old and expired.”
Criteria for BPD were not updated when the DSM-5 was published in 2013, and that needs to be fixed, Dr. Nelson added. “In the meantime, we’re trying to get the word out that it’s okay to interact with people about the diagnosis, discuss treatment plans, and manage it as one would with any other psychiatric or medical illness.”
An evolution, not a debate
Paul Appelbaum, MD, past president of the American Psychiatric Association and current chair of the organization’s DSM steering committee, said in an interview that he hasn’t been involved in any recent debate on this issue.
“I think practice has changed to the point where the general practice is to discuss patient diagnoses with [patients] openly. Patients appreciate that and psychiatrists have come to see the advantages of it,” said Dr. Appelbaum, a professor of psychiatry, medicine, and law at Columbia University, New York.
Dr. Appelbaum noted that patients also increasingly have access to their medical records, “so the reality is that it’s no longer possible in many cases to withhold a diagnosis.”
he said. “Maybe not everyone is entirely on board yet but there has been a sea change in psychiatric practices.”
Asked whether there needs to be some type of guideline update or statement released by the APA regarding BPD, Dr. Appelbaum said he doesn’t think the overall issue is BPD specific but applies to all psychiatric diagnoses.
“To the extent that there are still practitioners today that are telling students or residents [not to disclose], I would guess that they were trained a very long time ago and have not adapted to the new world,” he said.
“I don’t want to speak for the APA, but speaking for myself: I certainly encourage residents that I teach to be open about a diagnosis. It’s not just clinically helpful in some cases, it’s also ethically required from the perspective of allowing patients to make appropriate decisions about their treatment. And arguably it’s legally required as well, as part of the informed consent requirement,” Dr. Appelbaum said.
Regarding DSM updates, he noted that the committee “looks to the field to propose to us additions or changes to the DSM that are warranted by data that have been gathered since the DSM-5 came out.” There is a process set up on the DSM’s website to review such proposals.
In addition, Dr. Appelbaum said that there have been discussions about using a new model “that focuses on dimensions rather than on discreet categories” in order to classify personality disorders.
“There’s a group out there that is formulating a proposal that they will submit to us” on this, he added. “That’s the major discussion that is going on right now and it would clearly have implications for borderline as well as all the other personality disorders.”
In a statement, the APA said practice guidelines for BPD are currently under review and that the organization does not have a “position statement” on BPD for clinicians. The last update to its guideline was in the early 2000s.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.