Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2plfb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T07:34:21.516Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Assessment of Schizotypy and Cluster a Personality Profiles with Scid-ii and Swap-200.

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 April 2020

V. Zaccari
Affiliation:
Psychiatry, “Sapienza” Università di Roma, Roma, Italy
C. Torti
Affiliation:
Psychiatry, “Sapienza” Università di Roma, Roma, Italy
C. Squarcione
Affiliation:
Psychiatry, “Sapienza” Università di Roma, Roma, Italy
N. Buzzanca
Affiliation:
Psychiatry, “Sapienza” Università di Roma, Roma, Italy
F. Di Fabio
Affiliation:
Psychiatry, “Sapienza” Università di Roma, Roma, Italy
M. Biondi
Affiliation:
Psychiatry, “Sapienza” Università di Roma, Roma, Italy

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
Introduction

Schizotypy and Cluster A personality profiles are more represented in first-degree relatives of patients with schizophrenia than in the general population. This study presents two diagnostic instruments for the assessment of cluster A personality profiles: the Structured Clinical Interview for personality disorders Axis II (SCID-II) and the Shedler-Westen Assessment Procedure (SWAP 200).

Objectives

  1. 1) Verify sensitivity of SCID-II and SWAP-200 to detect schizophrenia spectrum personality traits;

  2. 2) Assess the prevalence of the traits and personality disorders (PD) related to cluster A.

Aim

Evaluate diagnostic sensitivity of these instruments in detecting schizotypy and cluster A personality profiles, that are ultra high risk predictors for psychosis.

Methods

25 schizophrenic patients(SchzP), 18 their first-degree relatives(FdR), 23 healthy-control(HC) subjects, have been subjected to personality assessment. MANOVA and subsequent planned comparisons were assessed to detect difference between PD profiles in the three groups.

Results

SchzP present significant scores relative to cluster A in both evaluations. FdR show statistically significant differences compared with HC, with higher mean scores relative to cluster A profiles measured with SWAP-200 [PD: Paranoid F(1,63)=7.02;p=0.01. Schizoid F(1,63)=6.56;p=0.013. Schizotypy F(1,63)=6.1;p=0.016; Q-Factor: Schizoid (F(1,63)=6.47;p=0.013; Paranoid F(1,63)=2.11;p=0.151], but not with SCID-II.

Conclusions

Data suggest low sensitivity of SCID-II to identify traits related to cluster A. FdR scored for traits related to schizophrenia spectrum greater than in the general population. SWAP-200 is able to accurately evidentiate the presence of schizotypal traits in FdR of patients with schizophrenia and suggests the importance of a clinical dimensional diagnosis for a more reliable identification of schizophrenia spectrum.

Type
Article: 0350
Copyright
Copyright © European Psychiatric Association 2015
Submit a response

Comments

No Comments have been published for this article.