Differential diagnosis of bipolar and borderline personality disorders Joel Paris†
Practice points Differential diagnosis in psychiatry is problematic because it depends on observable signs and symptoms
rather than on biological markers. The bipolar spectrum
– Proposals to expand the bipolar spectrum are based almost entirely on phenomenological resemblances; evidence for common family history, outcome and treatment response is very weak. – Mood swings need not necessarily reflect bipolarity. – Hypomania needs to be carefully assessed for time scale and persistence. Affective instability
– Affective instability is a separate construct from bipolarity and has developed its own emerging research literature. Borderline personality disorder
– Borderline personality disorder is a complex diagnosis characterized by mood instability, impulsivity and disturbed relationships. – The affective instability in borderline personality disorder does not resemble classical bipolar disorders, and can be distinguished from hypomania. Treatment implications
– Treatment of bipolar II disorder requires mood stabilizers, while clinical trials show that borderline personality disorder is most effectively managed with specialized psychotherapy. Conclusion
– Differences in treatment options make differential diagnosis of these disorders clinically important.
The hypothesis that many mental disorders fall within a bipolar spectrum, and that the mood instability that characterizes borderline personality disorder puts it into this spectrum is critically reviewed. This conclusion is based on phenomenological resemblances, and does not consider differences in course, outcome and treatment. Careful evaluation of hypomania is required to diagnose bipolar II disorder. Affective instability is McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada; and SMBD-Jewish General Hospital, Montreal, Canada; [email protected]
10.2217/NPY.11.21 © 2011 Future Medicine Ltd
Neuropsychiatry (2011) 1(3), 251–257
Review Paris a different phenomenon that characterizes borderline personality disorder. Differential diagnosis is important because bipolar disorders require medication, while borderline personality disorder is most effectively managed with specialized forms of psychotherapy.
Differential diagnosis in psychiatry Classification in psychiatry is problematic because diagnosis is not based on an understand ing of etiological and pathogenetic mechanisms, but on observable signs and symptoms. Hardly any of the disorders diagnosed by psychia trists are consistently correlated with biological markers [1,2] . In medicine, similar symptoms can derive from entirely different causes. Clustering of symptoms describes a syndrome, not a disease process. In the absence of precise and specific laboratory tests, all categories in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) system, including bipolar disorder, can only be regarded as provisional. Yet diagnostic categories can become popular for reasons other than validity. In the history of medicine, diagnoses may be preferred when new methods of treatment become available  . The usefulness of lithium and other mood stabilizers for the acute treatment of mania and for pre vention of relapse led psychiatrists to reconsider whether patients in other categories might suffer from a form of bipolar disorder  . This article will examine whether the evi dence supports the spectrum concept, and whether the spectrum includes borderline personality disorder. The bipolar spectrum Recent suggestions to extend the boundaries of bipolar disorder to a broad spectrum [5,6] led to a radically different concept of bipolarity. The assumption that mood swings, including cases marked more by irritability than by euphoria, justify a bipolar diagnosis requires the invo cation of a construct of ‘soft bipolarity’ (i.e., a variant or subclinical form of classical bipolar disorder)  . However, the expanded spectrum is defined entirely on the basis of phenom enological resemblances, and not on etiology or pathogenesis. Emil Kraepelin defined manic-depressive ill ness, later renamed bipolar disorder  . Since then, manic episodes have always required a classical triad of symptoms: elevated affect, psychomotor excitement and racing thoughts. Classically, psychiatrists would not diagnose
Neuropsychiatry (2011) 1(3)
mania or hypomania in the absence of eupho ria. However, after the introduction of lithium, it was observed that some patients who respond to that drug had atypical features such as irri tability. That observation led to questions as to whether states of excitement, irritability and aggression, seen in other categories of disorder, are symptoms of mania, and whether the classical triad is a necessary condition for diagnosis [5,6] . The concept of a bipolar spectrum is simi lar to that of a schizophrenic spectrum  , in which psychopathology can range from severe disabling illness to problems that appear to be ‘characterological’. The first person to suggest that a bipolar spectrum exists was Kraepelin  , who described subclinical cases in first-degree relatives of affected patients. But Kraepelin’s con cept has been greatly broadened, with some sur veys claiming that up to 30% of all psychiatric patients have a form of soft bipolarity  . The most generally accepted variant of the classical picture is bipolar II disorder  . This diagnosis describes mood swings from depression to hypomania rather than to full mania. This patient population is heterogeneous, in that only a few have a family history of bipolar disorder, and not all cases respond to mood stabilizers  . Some cases of bipolar II also meet criteria for personality disorders  . However, this overlap may not reflect true comorbidity, but diagnostic biases. Criteria for bipolarity can be quite broad, and epidemiological studies have sometimes considered all cases in which mood swings are observed as either bipolar II or bipolar spectrum disorders  . The key issue lies in the assessment of hypo mania. In the DSM-IV-TR  , this syndrome is defined as “a distinct period of persistently elevated, expansive, or irritable mood, lasting throughout at least 4 days, that is clearly dif ferent from the usual nondepressed mood”. Patients must then have at least three of the following (four if the mood is irritable and not euphoric): inflated self-esteem or grandiosity, decreased need for sleep, more talkative than usual or pressure to keep talking, flight of ideas or subjective experience that thoughts are rac ing, distractibility, increase in goal-directed activity (either socially, at work or school, or
future science group
Differential diagnosis of bipolar & borderline personality disorders sexually) or psychomotor agitation, and excessive involvement in pleasurable activities that have a potential for painful consequences. Finally, and crucially, a hypomanic episode must be associ ated with an unequivocal change in functioning that is uncharacteristic of the person when not symptomatic, and should be observable by other people. In contrast to full mania, hypomania need not be severe enough to cause marked impairment in social or occupational function ing, rarely necessitates hospitalization and is not associated with psychotic symptoms. In short, hypomanic episodes have require ments defined by severity, time scale, and per sistence. If one follows DSM criteria strictly, one could not make a bipolar II diagnosis in patients whose mood swings last less than 4 days, or in whom mood does not remain abnormal over the entire period. It has been suggested that the 4‑day rule is arbitrary  . This is true, but any other rule would be equally arbitrary. DSM-5 will appear in 2013  , and a 2‑day rule may be accepted, but that change would not affect the diagnosis of patients who experience mood swings on a daily or an hourly basis. Another variant of bipolar disorder in DSM-IV-TR is a ‘mixed state’, defined as at least a week in which a patient meets criteria for both major depression and mania. The research on this category is rather thin, and although some cases may be bipolar  , the category can be used to describe a heterogeneous group of angry and/or agitated patients. The DSM-IV-TR also allows for a diagnosis of bipolar disorder, not otherwise specified. Like other groupings in the manual, the not otherwise specified category describes patients with some but not all features of the disorder. In practice, it could be used to diagnose almost any patient with mood swings. In a formal proposal to describe the spec trum  , it has been suggested that bipolarity can take four basic forms: bipolar I, the clas sical manic-depressive category described by Kraepelin; bipolar II, depression with spontane ous hypomanic episodes; bipolar III, in which hypomanic episodes occur only after taking antidepressants; and bipolar IV, an ultra-rapidcycling disorder. The last category would include many personality disorders, as well as children with mood instability. Another suggestion describes even more forms of bipolar disorder  : bipolar I, full-blown mania; bipolar I½, depression with protracted
future science group
hypomania; bipolar II, depression with hypo manic episodes; bipolar II½, cyclothymic disor der; bipolar III, hypomania due to antidepressant drugs; bipolar III½, hypomania and/or depres sion associated with substance use; bipolar IV, depression associated with hypert hymic (i.e., mood) temperament; bipolar V,: recurrent depressions mixed with dysphoric hypomania; and bipolar VI, late-onset depression with mixed mood features, progressing to a dementia-like syndrome. These expanded definitions inevitably lead to high estimates of prevalence. None of these proposals are based on a gold standard for bipolarity or on consistent biologi cal markers derived from genetics or neurobiol ogy (which, in any case, do not exist). Instead, epidemiological and clinical studies have exam ined the prevalence of spectrum disorders using scales designed to assess symptoms of soft bipolar ity, identifying cases through the presence of sub threshold symptoms  . But it is equally possible that moodiness reflects a different phenomenon, not related to classical mood disorders. How can one validate the bipolar spectrum, if no specific biological markers are known? Kraepelin’s original definition of manicdepression was based on long-term outcome, yet more research would be needed to show that the course of putative spectrum conditions is similar to what Kraepelin described for mood episodes. Another possibility is to carry out ‘pharmaco logical dissection’  , in which similar responses to treatment suggest common endophenotypes. Yet clinical trials are needed to show that the drugs used to treat bipolar disorder are effective in putative spectrum disorders  . It is equally possible that the affective symptoms in spectrum conditions may be a different phenomenon based on a different mechanism. Affective instability When mood swings are associated with consis tent changes in grandiosity energy, psychomotor activity, and sleep, then it may be reasonable to see them as lying in the bipolar spectrum. But in the absence of these features, the main alter native is the construct of affective instability (AI)  , also called emotion dysregulation  . AI describes brief mood changes character ized by temporal instability, high intensity and delayed recovery from dysphoric states. The construct emphasizes a distinction between environmentally driven, short-duration mood swings (AI) versus spontaneous, long-duration
Review Paris mood swings (bipolar and unipolar mood disor ders). Although research on AI is still in its early stages, it can be reliably measured and separated from mood intensity  , has been shown to be distinct from neuroticism  and is a heritable trait  . Affective instability is a common feature of personality disorders, particularly the border line category [28,29] . Studies of patients diagnosed with borderline personality disorder (BPD) doc ument rapid shifts in mood, qualitatively differ ent from those seen in bipolar II disorder [30,31] . Thus, mood swings from depression to anger are seen, while euphoria is rare. Crucially, AI is highly sensitive to environmental cues and interpersonal stressors  . Finally, family stud ies of patients with BPD (with severe AI) find that diagnoses reflecting impulsivity, such as substance abuse and antisocial personality, are common in first-degree relatives, with unipolar depression being somewhat less common, and bipolar disorders rare  . Some research sug gests that AI can be associated with a unique pat tern of activity in functional imaging, and with unique changes in neurotransmitter activity  . All this research suggests that affective insta bility reflects a unique endophenotype. While it is possible that some patients with personality disorders share neurobiological predispositions with bipolar patients, one cannot assume that all (or most) do. Borderline personality disorder Borderline personality disorder is a complex multidimensional disorder characterized by emotion dysregulation, impulsivity and unsta ble relationships  . The label ‘borderline’ is outdated (derived from a theory that psycho pathology can fall on a border between psycho sis and neurosis). However, BPD is a clinically important disorder. It affects nearly 1% of the community population [34,35] , and is common in emergency rooms and out-patient clinics  . While BPD shows extensive comorbidity, its wide range of symptoms reflects severe person ality pathology. Major depression is particu larly common, and these symptoms are usually what bring patients to clinical attention  . In the past, mood disorder researchers  saw BPD as an atypical form of unipolar depres sion. But depressive symptoms do not show the same pattern in BPD: they are chronic rather than episodic, associated with a mercurial and fluctuating mood that is highly responsive to
Neuropsychiatry (2011) 1(3)
interpersonal life events  . Moreover, BPD patients show higher levels of impulsivity than patients with depression alone  , and have characteristic symptoms such as self-harm and recurrent overdoses that are uncommon in major depression. Finally, depressive symp toms show only marginal improvement with antidepressants, and these agents never lead to remission of the disorder  . Akiskal has now proposed that BPD falls within the bipolar spectrum, largely owing to its prominent affective instability  . All other symptoms would be secondary to abnormal mood. There are a number of problems with this hypothesis. First, one sees important differences in time scale and persistence of mood, which can change by the hour, and that respond to vicissitudes in relationships. While it is possible that these reactions are an effect rather than a cause of unstable mood, research using eco logical momentary assessment strongly suggests that these patients respond in abnormal ways to interpersonal conflict  . By contrast, the idea that AI in BPD reflects spontaneous ‘ultrarapid mood swings’  assumes, without suf ficient evidence, that all such shifts (or at least a fair percentage) are variants of hypomania or soft bipolarity. Moreover, the outcome of BPD is very differ ent from (and much more favorable than) bipo lar disorder. Whereas classical bipolarity does not remit with age (and often gets worse), the vast majority of BPD patients recover with time, and no longer meet criteria for the disorder by middle age  . Therefore, BPD has a relatively good prognosis, and its long-term outcome does not resemble bipolar II disorder. Another test would be to determine whether BPD responds to the same drugs as bipolar dis order (i.e., mood stabilizers). Only a few clinical trials have examined this question, but by and large, results suggest that the main impact of mood stabilizers in BPD patients is on impul sivity, not on mood. Lithium produces only a mild benefit, mainly in reduction of impulsive symptoms  , and the findings of clinical trials on carbamazepine  , divalproex  , topira mate  and lamotrigine  are similar. The tendency of drugs to control impulsivity rather than mood is not limited to lithium or anti convulsant mood stabilizers. Controlled trials of neuroleptics, as well as of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors in BPD patients, also find more effect on impulsivity than on mood  .
future science group
Differential diagnosis of bipolar & borderline personality disorders While these findings do not prove that disorders are separate, they also do not support putting them in the same spectrum. Differentiating the disorders In the absence of biological markers, distin guishing disorders that have similar or overlap ping symptoms can only be an educated guess. Even so, differences in treatment response make differential diagnosis clinically important. The key lies in establishing whether a patient has or has not had hypomanic episodes. Patient reports may not be sufficient to answer this ques tion  . Furthermore, it is not sufficient to take a brief history from patients who can often be vague about intensity and time scale. Since both false negatives and false positives are possible, it can be helpful to interview family members to determine consistency of symptoms, time scale, whether mood changes lead to behavioral con sequences, and whether they are noticeable to others. Shortening the length of time for hypo mania, as may occur in DSM-5, would lead to increased diagnoses of bipolar II. However, care ful evaluation, supported by the empirical lit erature  , shows that BPD patients rarely have consistently elevated (or irritable) mood for as long as 48 h. The obstacles to accurate differential diagnosis reflect the popularity of the bipolar diagnosis. This is not to say that true bipolar disorders are never misdiagnosed as BPD – they can be. But most cases of BPD are not recognized in prac tice, and many patients will be called bipolar, even when they do not meet DSM criteria  . Clinicians can sometimes have a ‘knee-jerk’ diag nostic response to mood swings. Many are unfa miliar with the concept of a personality disorder, but receive a continuous stream of claims for bipolar spectrum diagnoses, both from experts who believe in this idea, and from pharmaceutical companies who want to increase sales. Implications for treatment Differential diagnosis is important when it leads to different treatment choices. Bipolar I and bipolar II disorder always require medical management. Lithium is still the drug with the strongest support for both types in clinical tri als. More research is needed on anticonvulsant mood stabilizers, and some evidence supports atypical neuroleptics as useful adjunctive agents. By contrast, if the diagnosis is BPD, drugs will have only marginal benefits.
future science group
While many BPD patients are on poly pharmacy regimes, with 4–5 drugs drawn from each major class  , there is little evidence that this kind of treatment is helpful (not to speak of their long-term side effects). The problem is that a diagnosis of bipolar disorder is likely to lead to the use of multiple pharmacological agents. Instead, there is good evidence that patients with BPD benefit most from psychotherapies spe cifically tailored for their symptoms  . There is strong evidence for the effectiveness of dialectical behavior therapy  , and for a similar method, mentalization-based therapy  . Research also shows that while unstructured and generic psychotherapies often fail in BPD patients, any method that offers a systematic and well-planned approach can yield favorable results  . The main obstacle to effective treatment of BPD lies in a lack of access to psychological ser vices that are expensive and require trained thera pists. It is much easier to make a bipolar diagnosis and to write a prescription. Conclusion & future perspective While there are insufficient data to reach a final conclusion, researchers advocating an expansion of the bipolar spectrum to include BPD have not proven their case. Recognition of BPD in clinical practice, and differentiation from bipolar II, is of practical importance for effective treatment. We still have few data on the etiology, patho genesis, outcome and treatment of bipolar spec trum disorders. Since researchers committed to the validity of the spectrum have conducted many published studies, some of the results could reflect their enthusiasm. Also, research has not taken into account the limitations of phenom enological diagnosis. There is also a need for study of the nature of AI, to establish a clearer boundary between hypomania and emotion dys regulation. Both bipolar II disorder and BPD are heterogeneous disorders: more evidence-based definitions could help to reduce their overlap. Financial & competing interests disclosure The author has no relevant affiliations or financial involvement with any organization or entity with a financial interest in or financial conflict with the subject matter or materials discussed in the manuscript. This includes employment, consultancies, honoraria, stock ownership or options, expert testimony, grants or patents received or pending, or royalties. No writing assistance was utilized in the production of this manuscript.
Review Paris Bibliography
Papers of special note have been highlighted as: of interest n
Frances A: Whither DSM–V? Br. J. Psychiatry 195, 391–392 (2009).
First MB: Paradigm shifts and the development of the diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders: past experiences and future aspirations. Can. J. Psychiatry 55, 692–700 (2010).
Shorter E: A History of Psychiatry: From the Era of the Asylum to the Age of Prozac. John Wiley and Sons, NY, USA (1997).
Healy D: Mania. Johns Hopkins Press, Baltimore, MD, USA (2009).
Akiskal HS: The bipolar spectrum – the shaping of a new paradigm in psychiatry. Curr. Psychiatry Rep. 4, 1–3 (2002).
Angst J, Gamma A, Benazzi F, Ajdacic V, Eich D, Rossler W: Toward a re-definition of subthreshold bipolarity: epidemiology and proposed criteria for bipolar-II, minor bipolar disorders and hypomania. J. Affect. Disord. 73, 133–146 (2003).
Perugi G, Akiskal HS: The soft bipolar spectrum redefined: focus on the cyclothymic, anxious-sensitive, impulsedyscontrol, and binge-eating connection in bipolar II and related conditions. Psych. Clin. N. Am. 25, 713–737 (2002). Kraepelin E: Manic-Depressive Insanity and Paranoia. Churchill Livingstone, Edinburgh, UK (1921). Siever LJ, Davis KL: The pathophysiology of schizophrenia disorders: perspectives from the spectrum. Am. J. Psychiatry 161, 398–413 (2004). Akiskal HS, Akiskal KK, Lancrenon S et al.: Validating the bipolar spectrum in the French National EPIDEP Study: overview of the phenomenology and relative prevalence of its clinical prototypes. J. Affect. Disord. 96, 197–205 (2006).
Akiskal HS, Benazzi F: Family history validation of the bipolar nature of depressive mixed states. J. Affect. Disord. 73, 113–122 (2003).
Reviews the empirical literature on the interface between borderline personality disorder and bipolar spectrum disorder.
Ghaemi SN, Ko JY, Goodwin FK: “Cade’s disease” and beyond: misdiagnosis, antidepressant use, and a proposed definition for bipolar spectrum disorder. Can. J. Psychiatry 47, 125–134 (2002).
20 Akiskal HS: The evolving bipolar spectrum:
28 Siever LJ, Davis KL: A psychobiological
perspective on the personality disorders. Am. J. Psychiatry 148, 1647–1658 (1991). n
Klein DF: Anxiety reconceptualized: gleaning from pharmacological dissection – early experience with imipramine and anxiety. Mod. Probl. Pharmacopsychiatry 22, 1–35 (1987).
22 Patten S, Paris J: The bipolar spectrum – a
bridge too far? Can. J. Psychiatry 53, 762–768 (2008). 23 Koenigsberg H: Affective instability: toward an
integration of neuroscience and psychological perspectives. J. Pers. Disord. 24, 60–82 (2010). n
Update on affective instability (AI) research, from neurobiology to psychology.
24 Koole SL: The psychology of emotion
regulation: an integrative review. Cognition Emotion 23, 4–41 (2009). 25 Miller JD, Pilkonis PA: Neuroticism and
affective instability: the same or different? Am. J. Psychiatry 163, 839–845 (2006). 26 Russell J, Moskowitz D, Sookman D,
Paris J: Affective instability in patients with borderline personality disorder. J. Abnorm. Psychology 116, 578–588 (2007). Shows how AI in borderline personality disorder responds to interpersonal stressors.
27 Livesley WJ, Jang KL, Jackson DN,
Vernon PA: Genetic and environmental contributions to dimensions of personality disorder. Am. J. Psychiatry 150, 1826–1831 (1993).
Neuropsychiatry (2011) 1(3)
Theoretical paper on the role of AI and impulsivity.
29 Crowell SE, Beauchaine T, Linehan MM:
A biosocial developmental model of borderline personality: elaborating and extending Linehan’s theory. Psychological Bull. 135, 495–510 (2009). 30 Henry C, Mitropoulou V, New AS,
Koenigsberg HW, Silverman J, Siever LJ: Affective instability and impulsivity in borderline personality and bipolar II disorders: similarities and differences. J. Psychiatric Res. 35, 307–312 (2001). 31
Koenigsberg HW, Harvey PD, Mitropolou V et al.: Characterizing affective instability in borderline personality disorder. Am. J. Psychiatry 159, 784–788 (2002).
32 White CN, Gunderson JG, Zanarini MC,
Hudson JI: Family studies of borderline personality disorder: a review. Harvard Rev. Psychiatry 12, 118–119 (2003). 33 Paris J: Treatment of Borderline Personality
prototypes I, II, III, and IV. Psychiatric Clin. N. Am. 22, 517–534 (1999).
The interface between borderline personality disorder and bipolar spectrum disorder. Comp. Psychiatry 48, 145–154 (2007).
Smith DJ, Ghaemi SN: Hypomania in clinical practice. Adv. Psychiatric Treat. 12, 110–120 (2006). Regier D, Narrow WE, Kuhl E, Kupfer DJ: The Conceptual Evolution of DSM-5. American Psychiatric Publishing, Washington, DC, USA.
Bipolar II disorder: an overview of recent developments. Can. J. Psychiatry 49, 802–812 (2004). 13 Paris J, Gunderson JG, Weinberg I:
American Psychiatric Association: Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (4th Edition). American Psychiatric Press, Washington, DC, USA (2000).
Berk M, Dodd S: Bipolar II disorder: a review. Bipolar Disord. 7, 11–21 (2004).
12 Hadjipavlou G, Mok H, Yatham LN:
Merikangas KR, Akiskal HS, Angst J et al.: Lifetime and 12-month prevalence of bipolar spectrum disorder in the National Comorbidity Survey replication. Arch. Gen. Psychiatry 64, 543–552 (2007).
Disorder: A Guide to Evidence-Based Practice. Guilford Press, NY, USA (2008). 34 Coid J, Yang M, Tyrer P, Roberts A, Ullrich S:
Prevalence and correlates of personality disorder in Great Britain. Br. J. Psychiatry, 188, 423–431 (2006). 35
Lenzenweger MF, Lane MC, Loranger AW, Kessler RC: DSM-IV personality disorders in the National Comorbidity Survey Replication. Biol. Psychiatry 62, 553–556 (2007).
36 Zanarini MC, Frankenburg FR, Dubo ED,
Sickel AE, Trikha A, Levin A: Axis I comorbidity of borderline personality disorder. Am. J. Psychiatry 155, 1733–1739 (1998). 37 Akiskal HS, Chen SE, Davis GC: Borderline:
an adjective in search of a noun. J. Clin. Psychiatry 46, 41–48 (1985). 38 Akiskal HS: Demystifying borderline
personality: critique of the concept and unorthodox reflections on its natural kinship with the bipolar spectrum. Acta Psychiatr. Scand. 110, 401–407 (2004). 39 McKinnon DF, Pies R: Affective instability as
rapid cycling: theoretical and clinical implications for borderline personality and bipolar spectrum disorders. Bipolar Disord. 8, 1–14 (2006). 40 Paris J: Personality Disorders Over Time:
Precursors, Course, and Outcome. American Psychiatric Press, Washington, DC, USA (2003).
future science group
Differential diagnosis of bipolar & borderline personality disorders 41 Links PS, Steiner M, Boiago I, Irwin D:
Lithium therapy for borderline patients: preliminary findings. J. Pers. Disord. 4, 173–181 (1990). 42 Cowdry RW, Gardner DL, O’Leary KM,
Leibenluft E, Rubinow DR: Mood variability: a study of four groups. Am. J. Psychiatry 148, 1505–1511 (1991).
the history of hypomania in bipolar II patients and patients with major depression. Comp. Psychiatry 34, 303–307 (1993). n
future science group
Bleichmar J: Treatment histories of borderline inpatients. Comp. Psychiatry 42, 144–150 (2001). 49 Paris J: Effectiveness of differing
psychotherapy approaches in the treatment of borderline personality disorder. Curr. Psychiatry Rep. 12, 56–60 (2010). 50 Linehan MM: Dialectical Behavioral Therapy
for Borderline Personality Disorder. Guilford, MY, USA (1993).
Underlines problems of identifying hypomania.
47 Zimmerman M, Galione JN, Ruggero CJ
Bateman A, Fonagy P: Psychotherapy for Borderline Personality Disorder: Mentalization Based Treatment. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK (2004).
McMain SF, Links PS, Gnam WH et al.: A randomized trial of dialectical behavior therapy. Am. J. Psychiatry 166, 1365–1374 (2009).
et al.: Screening for bipolar disorder and finding borderline personality disorder. J. Clin. Psychiatry 71, 1212–1217 (2010).
44 Nickel MK, Nickel C, Mitterlehner FO:
Topiramate treatment of aggression in female borderline personality disorder patients: a double-blind, placebo-controlled study. J. Clin. Psychiatry 65, 1515–1519 (2004).
48 Zanarini MC, Frankenburg FR, Khera GS,
46 Dunner DI, Tay KL: Diagnostic reliability of
43 Hollander E, Allen A, Lopez RP,
Bienstock CA, Grossman R, Siever LJ: A preliminary double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of divalproex sodium in borderline personality disorder. J. Clin. Psychiatry 62, 199–203 (2001).
Tritt K, Nickel C, Lahmann C: Lamotrigine treatment of aggression in female borderline patients: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. J. Psychopharmacol. 19, 287–291 (2005).
Demonstrates frequency of bipolar misdiagnosis in borderline personality disorder.