Search

Background: The current categorical split of mood disorders in bipolar (BP) disorders and depressive disorders has recently been questioned. The presence of a significant number of manic/hypomanic symptoms in patients with recurrent unipolar depression seems to challenge the traditional dichotomy of unipolar-BP disorder. Two highly unstable personality features, i.e., the cyclothymic temperament (CT) and borderline personality disorder, have been found to be more common in BP disorder than in major depressive disorder. Aim: The aim was to assess the distributions of the number of mood spectrum, CT, and borderline personality items between two groups. Finding no bimodal distribution (a "zone of rarity") of these items would support a continuity between the two disorders. Methods: Forty euthymic BP disorder patients and forty unipolar depression patients were administered the Structured Clinical Interview for the Mood Spectrum, which assesses lifetime symptoms, traits, and lifestyles that characterize threshold and subthreshold mood episodes. CT was assessed using Temperament Evaluation of Memphis, Pisa, Paris and San Diego-A relative to CT and borderline personality trait (BPT) was assessed using Structured Clinical Interview for DSM Disorders II personality questionnaire relative to BPT. The distribution of the number of CT and BPT items was studied by Kernel density estimate. Result: Patient with recurrent depression endorsed manic/hypomanic items though less than BP group. However, the Kernel density estimates distributions of the number of hypomanic/manic items, CT and BPT items in the entire sample had a normal-like shape (i.e. no bimodality). Conclusion: Normal-like curves in the distributions of mood symptoms, number of CT and BPT items in the entire sample, suggest significant amount of overlap of these characteristic in both the groups. Using the bimodality approach, continuity between BP and major depressive disorder (MDD) seems to be supported, questioning the current categorical splitting of BP and MDD based on classic diagnostic validators. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Bipolar affective disorder and borderline personality disorder have long been considered to have significant similarities and comorbidity. This review endeavours to clarify the similarities and differences between these disorders, with an effort to determine whether they reflect different forms of the same illness or separate illness clusters.Method: The published literature relating to bipolar affective disorders, borderline personality disorders, and related areas of knowledge was reviewed using searches of several electronic databases (AMED, CINHAL, Embase, Ovid, ProQuest, MEDLINE, Web of Science, ScienceDirect) and published texts. These findings were combined with the personal clinical experience of the author, and information gathered from colleagues, to create a review of this topic.Results: Bipolar affective disorders and borderline personality disorders differ with respect to sense of self, disruption of relationships, family history of bipolar disorders, the benefits of medications, the extent of cognitive deficits, the form of affective dysregulation and mood cycling, the incidence of suicide and suicide attempts, the form of psychotic episodes, the incidence of early sexual abuse but not early trauma in general, the loss of brain substance, alterations in cortical activity, glucocorticoid receptor sensitivity, and mitochondrial dysfunction. They are similar with respect to non-specific features of affective dysregulation, the incidence of atypical depressive features, the incidence of self-mutilation, the incidence of transporter polymorphisms, possible genetic linkages, overall reduction in limbic modulation, reduction in the size of hippocampi and amygdala, and the incidence of sleep disruption.Conclusions: This review concludes that bipolar affective disorders and borderline personality disorder are separate disorders, but have significant elements in common. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Background: Previous studies have detected different variables influencing the attitude towards mentally ill individuals but they have never addressed mania. Furthermore, it is not known whether the same factors affect attitudes towards individuals experiencing major depressive or manic episodes. Aims: Besides factors such as familiarity with mental illness, we were interested whether vulnerability to psychosis and mood disorders as well as social desirability can affect attitudes towards major depressive episodes and manic episodes. Methods: Subjects were presented with a case vignette describing an individual experiencing either a major depressive episode or a manic episode (n = 188, age 16-34 years). Their attitudes towards that person were assessed. Furthermore, factors potentially influencing these attitudes have been assessed such as personal vulnerability factors (i.e. cyclothymia and magical ideation) and social desirability bias. Results: Familiarity with the phenomenon of mental illness turned out to influence the attitude towards affective episodes, whereas the influence of the other potential predictors such as their own experience of affective or schizotypal symptoms failed to appear to be of significance. Conclusions: Whereas 'familiarity' turned out to be a factor positively influencing the attitude towards depression, it turned out to have a rather negative influence on the attitude towards mania. This result could have important implications for anti-stigma campaigns. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

It is estimated that only one-third of the people with bipolar disorder are correctly diagnosed, and even fewer are receiving appropriate treatment. This information is of concern, particularly in light of emerging data reflecting the potential negative consequences of failed or delayed diagnosis and lack of focused treatment. The article attempts to illuminate this complex disorder by describing the bipolar spectrum through a review of the criteria for diagnosis, aswell as practical advice on improving the detection of the disorder. Treatment options for bipolar disorder, with a focus on the latest pharmacological evidence base, as well as clinical recommendations regarding the safe and effective use of mood stabilizers and antidepressants are presented. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]