Diss. (sammanfattning) Stockholm : Karol. inst., 2006. / Härtill 4 uppsatser.

Thesis (M.S.)--University of Michigan, 1992.

Thesis (M.S.)--University of Michigan, 1992.

Theoretischer Hintergrund: Die Arbeitsgruppe Persönlichkeit und Persönlichkeitsstörung für das DSM-5 erarbeitete aufgrund der umfangreichen Kritik an der DSM-IV-TR Klassifikation von Persönlichkeitsstörungen hinsichtlich der kategorialen Diagnosen und Konstruktvalidität eine neue Klassifikation, die als alternatives DSM-5 Modell im Abschnitt III des Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, fifth edition, integriert wurde. Dies schloss auch die Entwicklung neuer allgemeiner Kriterien für Persönlichkeitsstörung ein. Die Kriterien A und B dieser allgemeinen Kriterien stellen die notwendigen Merkmale (essential features) von Persönlichkeitsstörung dar. Die Kriterien C bis G definieren den zeitlichen und situationalen Geltungsbereich der notwendigen Merkmale. Kriterium A der allgemeinen Kriterien umfasst die Kernmerkmale von Persönlichkeitsstörung Selbstpathologie und interpersonale Pathologie. Diese Kernmerkmale gehen zurück auf die Definition von Persönlichkeitsstörung von Livesley. Das alternative DSM-5 Modell geht des Weiteren davon aus, dass sich Selbstpathologie und interpersonale Pathologie in einer eindimensionalen Skala der Funktionsniveaus der Persönlichkeit integrieren lassen, welche die Einschätzung des Beeinträchtigungsgrades auf einer fünfstufigen Skala erlaubt. Neben Kriterium A muss außerdem gemäß Kriterium B des alternativen DSM-5 Modells der allgemeinen Kriterien für Persönlichkeitsstörung zumindest ein pathologisches Persönlichkeitstrait vorliegen. Dahinter steht die Annahme, dass die Dysfunktion von Persönlichkeit (Kriterium A) getrennt von der Beschreibung der Persönlichkeitspathologie (Kriterium B) erfasst werden kann. Letztendlich stützt sich die empirische Basis zu den aktuell vorgeschlagenen Kernmerkmalen von Persönlichkeitsstörung Selbstpathologie und interpersonale Pathologie im alternativen DSM-5 Modell lediglich auf eine Studie. Ziele: Die vorliegende Doktorarbeit setzte sich in Anbetracht der geringen empirischen Basis zum Ziel, die Kernmerkmale von Persönlichkeitsstörung des alternativen DSM-5 Modells empirisch zu überprüfen. Auf der Grundlage der Definition von Persönlichkeitsstörung, die auch die theoretische Grundlage für die Kernmerkmale von Persönlichkeitsstörung im alternativen DSM-5 Modell bildete, wurde ein Fragebogen entwickelt: Das General Assessment of Personality Disorder (GAPD). Das GAPD wurde für den deutschen Sprachraum adaptiert und zeigte eine zufriedenstellende Reliabilität hinsichtlich interner Konsistenz. Dieser Fragebogen hat 85 Items mit jeweils vier Skalen zu Selbstpathologie und Interpersonaler Pathologie. Das GAPD wurde erstens herangezogen, um zu überprüfen, ob die Kernmerkmale Selbstpathologie und interpersonale Pathologie Patienten mit und ohne Persönlichkeitsstörung differenzieren können und zweitens ob diese Merkmale tatsächlich die Bandbreite von Persönlichkeitspathologie abbilden können. Außerdem sollte drittens geprüft werden, ob die Integration von Selbstpathologie und interpersonaler Pathologie innerhalb einer Skala auch empirisch gerechtfertigt werden kann. Viertens sollte untersucht werden, ob die Dysfunktion von Persönlichkeit (Kriterium A) getrennt von der näheren Beschreibung der Persönlichkeitspathologie (Kriterium B) erfasst werden kann. Hierzu wurde der Zusammenhang der Kernmerkmale von Persönlichkeitsstörung (Kriterium A), operationalisiert durch den GAPD, mit den Persönlichkeitstraits (Kriterium B), erfasst mit dem Dimensional Assessment of Personality Pathology (DAPP-BQ) und mit dem NEO-Persönlichkeitsinventar nach Costa und McCrae, Revidierte Fassung (NEO-PI-R), untersucht. Ergebnisse: (1) Sowohl für die Selbstpathologie-Skalen als auch für die Interpersonalen Pathologie-Skalen des GAPD konnte gezeigt werden, dass sie zwischen Patienten mit (n = 75) und ohne Persönlichkeitsstörung (n = 74) differenzierten. Ausnahme bildete hier die Skala (P3) Prosoziales Verhalten. Das GAPD konnte 82 % der Patienten richtig als Patienten mit und ohne Persönlichkeitsstörung zuordnen beruhend auf Diagnosen, die mit dem Strukturierten Klinischen Interview für DSM-IV, Achse II: Persönlichkeitsstörungen (SKID-II) ermittelt wurden. (2) Außerdem zeigten sich für neun der zwölf DSM-IV Persönlichkeitsstörungen mittlere bis hohe Korrelationen mit den Skalen des GAPD. Ausnahmen bildeten hier die zwanghafte, antisoziale und histrionische Persönlichkeitsstörung. Ebenso ergaben sich hohe Korrelationen zwischen GAPD, DAPP und NEO-PI-R hinsichtlich aller korrespondierender Traits auf Domain Ebene des DSM-5 Traitmodells (Negative Affektivität, Bindungslosigkeit, Feindseligkeit, Enthemmung und Psychotizismus). (3) Des Weiteren ergab sich ein Ein-Faktorenmodell für die Skalen des GAPD mit einer Varianzaufklärung von 61,4 %. Die Selbstpathologie Skalen hatten höhere Ladungen auf dem Faktor (.88 - .93) als die Interpersonalen Pathologie-Skalen (.66 - .78). Lediglich die Skala (P3) Prosoziales Verhalten zeigte eine niedrige Ladung (.31). (4) Inkrementelle Validität ergab sich für den DAPP und NEO-PI-R über den GAPD. Umgekehrt zeigte sich dies nur für den GAPD über den NEO-PI-R. Diskussion und Ausblick: Auf der Grundlage der Ergebnisse zum GAPD konnte gezeigt werden, dass erstens die Skalen des GAPD, die die Kernmerkmale von Persönlichkeitsstörung (1) Selbstpathologie und (2) Interpersonale Pathologie des alternativen DSM-5 Modells zum großen Teil erfassen, das Vorliegen einer Persönlichkeitsstörung gut vorhersagen können. Zweitens wiesen die Ergebnisse daraufhin, dass die Skalen des GAPD, zum einen mit hohen Traitausprägungen sowohl von normalen als auch pathologischen Traitmodellen, in der vorliegenden Arbeit erfasst durch NEO-PI-R und DAPP, korrelierten und zum anderen mit neun der zwölf DSM-IV Persönlichkeitsstörungen. Damit können die Kernmerkmale eine große Bandbreite von Persönlichkeitspathologie abbilden. Drittens wurde die Integration von Selbstpathologie und interpersonaler Pathologie in einer eindimensionalen Skala faktorenanalytisch bestätigt. Viertens konnte eine getrennte Erfassung von Dysfunktionen von Persönlichkeitsstörung und Persönlichkeitsbeschreibungen, wie sie in den Kriterien A und B des alternativen DSM-5 Modells gefordert wird, in der vorliegenden Arbeit nur zum Teil empirisch Bestätigung finden, da zwar sowohl normale als auch pathologische Persönlichkeitstraits zu den Kernmerkmalen Informationen hinzufügen konnten bei der Untersuchung der inkrementellen Validität, aber andersherum die Kernmerkmale, erfasst durch das GAPD, nur bei normalen Persönlichkeitstraits, erfasst durch das NEO-PI-R, Informationen hinzufügen konnte. Das DAPP als pathologisches Traitmodell deckte bereits die Informationen des GAPD fast vollständig ab. Insgesamt untermauern die Ergebnisse zum GAPD die Validität der Kernmerkmale von Persönlichkeitsstörung des Kriteriums A und die Skala der Funktionsniveaus der Persönlichkeit des alternativen DSM-5 Modells. Die Skala (P3) Prosoziales Verhalten scheint wenig Relevanz für die Diagnostik von Persönlichkeitsstörung zu besitzen. Bei der Interpretation der Ergebnisse zum GAPD sollten folgende Einschränkungen beachtet werden. Zum einen erfasst das GAPD nicht vollständig die Facetten der Kernmerkmale des Kriteriums A des alternativen DSM-5 Modells. Des Weiteren beruht das GAPD auf Selbstauskünften, was aufgrund der Störung in der Selbstwahrnehmung dieser Patienten ein Nachteil bei der Diagnostik von Persönlichkeitsstörung darstellt. Probleme für die Interpretation der Ergebnisse des GAPD ergeben sich außerdem daraus, dass als Vergleichskriterium die DSM-IV Persönlichkeitsstörungen erhoben wurden. Diese Klassifikation gilt an sich als wenig valide und daher die Erfassung als nicht reliabel. Daher wird es in zukünftigen Studien wichtig sein, die neuen Kriterien der spezifischen Persönlichkeitsstörungen des alternativen DSM-5 Modells bzw. das DSM-5 Traitmodell und das hierzu neu entwickelte Erfassungsinstrument Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5) zugrunde zu legen. Nichtsdestotrotz ist das GAPD das erste Instrument, welches die Kernmerkmale von Persönlichkeitsstörung des alternativen DSM-5 Modells psychometrisch überhaupt erfassbar macht. Es bot die Grundlage dieser Doktorarbeit, die Validität der Kernmerkmale für Persönlichkeitsstörung des alternativen DSM-5 Modells empirisch zu untermauern. Es wird vorgeschlagen, eine kürzere Version des GAPD als Screening im ersten Schritt des Diagnoseprozesses von Persönlichkeitsstörung anzuwenden, gegebenenfalls gefolgt im zweiten Schritt von einem strukturierten Interview. / Theoretical Background: The DSM-5 Work Group for personality and personality disorders developed a new classification of personality disorder based on extensive critiques concerning categorical diagnoses and construct validity of the DSM-IV classification. The new classification was integrated as alternative DSM-5 model for personality disorders into section III of the Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders, fifth edition. The alternative DSM-5 model for personality disorders also includes new general criteria for personality disorder in DSM-5. The criteria A and B of the general criteria are the essential features of personality disorder. The general criteria C through G define the scope concerning time and situations and exclusion criteria. Criterion A encompasses the core features of personality disorder: self and interpersonal pathology. These core features are based on the definition of personality disorder from Livesley. The DSM-5 model assumes that self and interpersonal pathology can be integrated into a unidimensional Personality Functioning Scale, which enables a five-level rating of impairment in self / interpersonal functioning. Next to criterion A, criterion B of the general criteria for personality disorder requires at least one pathological personality trait to be fulfilled. This entails the assumption that personality dysfunction alone can be measured, independent of personality traits. Finally, the empirical foundation for the proposed core features of personality disorder, self and interpersonal functioning, is based on only one study. Aims: The current doctoral thesis is aimed at validating the core features of personality disorder in the DSM-5, in light of the small empirical foundation existing today. Livesley\'s definition of personality disorder, which is the theoretical basis of criterion A of the general criteria for personality disorder in the DSM-5, was also used to develop a self-report questionnaire: the General Assessment of Personality Disorder (GAPD). The GAPD was translated into German and showed sufficient reliability in terms of internal consistency. The questionnaire has 85 items with four scales for self pathology and four scales for interpersonal pathology. First, the GAPD was used to investigate whether the core features of personality, self and interpersonal pathology, are able to differentiate between patients with and without personality disorder. Second, whether the core features cover the full range of personality pathology was examined. Third, the integration of self and interpersonal pathology into a unidimensional scale was empirically validated. Fourth, whether functional impairment (criterion A) can be assessed separately from personality traits (criterion B) was investigated. This last investigation was carried out by analyzing the relationship between the core features of personality disorder (criterion A) and pathological personality traits (criterion B). Criterion A was operationalized by the GAPD; criterion B was measured by the Dimensional Assessment of Personality Pathology (DAPP-BQ) and additionally by the Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R). Results: (1) The patients (n = 75) with personality disorder differed significantly from patients without personality disorder (n = 74) in all Self Pathology and Interpersonal Pathology scales of the GAPD, except (P3) Prosocial Behaviour. The GAPD identified 82 % of patients correctly, as patients with or without personality disorder diagnoses, based on the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV Axis II Personality Disorders (SKID-II). (2) Furthermore, the GAPD scales showed moderate to high correlations for nine of twelve DSM-IV personality disorders. The exceptions were obsessive-compulsive, antisocial and histrionic personality disorders. Similarly, there were moderate to high correlations between GAPD, DAPP and NEO-PI-R, with regard to all corresponding DSM-5 trait model domains (Negative Affectivity, Detachment, Antagonism, Disinhibition, and Psychoticism). (3) Additionally, the analysis yielded a one-factor model with an explained variance of 61.4 %. The Self Pathology scales showed higher factor loadings (.88 - .93) than the Interpersonal Pathology scales (.66 - .78). But (P3) Prosocial Behaviour showed a low loading (.31). (4) The DAPP and NEO-PI-R showed incremental validity over the GAPD, but the GAPD only over the NEO-PI-R. Discussion and outlook: Based on the results it could be shown that, first, the scales of the GAPD, which largely measure the core features of personality disorder in the DSM-5, (1) self pathology and (2) interpersonal pathology, were able to predict the presence of personality disorder well. Second, the results showed large correlations between the GAPD-scales and high trait expressions in both normal and abnormal trait models, measured by the DAPP and NEO-PI-R, as well as large correlations between the GAPD scales and nine of twelve DSM-IV personality disorders. Thus, the core features of personality disorder covered a wide range of personality pathology. Third, factor-analytic studies confirmed the integration of self and interpersonal pathology into a unidimensional scale. Fourth, it could be shown in part that functional impairment can be assessed separately from personality traits, as demanded by criteria A and B of the DSM-5. Normal and abnormal trait models were able to add information to the core features of personality disorder when assessing the incremental validity, but the core features could only add information to normal personality traits. The DAPP as a pathological trait model already covers the information of the GAPD. In summary, the results of the GAPD confirm the validity of the core features of personality disorder of criterion A and the Personality Functioning Scale in the DSM-5. The scale (P3) Prosocial Behaviour seems to have little significance for the diagnosis of personality disorders. The following limitations need to be considered in the interpretation of the results. The GAPD does not capture all facets of the core features of criterion A of the DSM-5. Furthermore, the GAPD is based on self-reporting, which is a disadvantage in the diagnosis of personality disorders, because of a distortion in the self-perception of those patients. Problems in the interpretation of the results might also be due to the use of the DSM-IV personality disorder as the comparison criterion. This classification is regarded as invalid and its assessment as less reliable. Thus, the new criteria of the individual DSM-5 personality disorders and the DSM-5 trait model, as well as the newly developed assessment tool Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5), should be included in future studies. Nevertheless, the GAPD is the first tool to allow an assessment of the core features of personality disorder in the DSM-5. It provided the foundation of the current doctoral thesis to confirm the validity of the core features of personality disorder in the DSM-5. It is proposed that a shorter version of the GAPD could be used to screen for personality disorder in the first step of the diagnostic process, followed by a structured interview in the second step, if necessary.

Clinicians’ attitudes and behaviors toward patients with borderline personality disorder (BPD) are affected by the label’s stigma. Complex posttraumatic stress disorder (CPTSD) was proposed as a comprehensive and less stigmatizing diagnostic category for clients with BPD and a history of complex trauma. Given considerable similarities across both disorders’ diagnostic criteria, the CPTSD framework holds promise as a means to improve therapists’ attitudes towards clients with BPD and a history of complex trauma. However, this quality of CPTSD had not yet been examined empirically. Using vignettes in a between-subjects experimental design, this study investigated whether CPTSD is a less stigmatizing label than BPD for trauma survivors. Participants were 322 practicing psychotherapists. Evidence of BPD stigma was found, as was an affinity for CPTSD. Results generally supported CPTSD as a less stigmatizing label than BPD; therapists presented with a CPTSD-labeled vignette were somewhat less likely to blame the client for her symptomatic behavior and expected slightly stronger working alliance with the client than therapists presented with the BPD-labeled vignette. However, therapists’ agreement with the BPD diagnosis and theoretical orientation were found to be more salient than diagnostic label in affecting concepts related to the stigmatization of BPD clients. Additionally, familiarity with CPTSD was related to more favorable attitudes toward the client and her course of treatment. Regardless of CPTSD’s recognition as a formal diagnosis, education about the construct is widely recommended for therapists.

Personality disorders have traditionally been considered refractory to psychological interventions. Two of the most common, and potentially harmful personality disorders are antisocial personality disorder / psychopathy, and narcissism. Although a great deal of conceptual overlap exists between psychopathy and narcissism, the empirical study of these constructs has proceeded largely independently of one another. Further complicating the discrimination of these constructs is the identification of the bi-factorial nature of psychopathy - conceptualised as primary and secondary psychopathy - as well as the identification of two distinct forms of narcissism, overt and covert. The recent resurgence of interest in the sub-clinical manifestations of these two constructs has led to the development of a number of easily administered instruments to measure each of the psychopathy and narcissism constructs, as dimensional traits, within normal populations. This has provided empirically validated and reliable instruments to further explicate these two overlapping constructs. The first of the two studies reported sought to discriminate between psychopathy and narcissism through the recharacterisation of these constructs in terms of the early maladaptive schemas outlined in Young’s early maladaptive schema theory (Young, 1999). Two hundred and ninety one participants completed questionnaires measuring primary and secondary psychopathy, overt and covert narcissism, and early maladaptive schemas. Findings are consistent with the hypothesis that psychopathy and narcissism are discriminable in cognitive-interpersonal terms, as operationalised by early maladaptive schemas. Findings also call into question the earlier observed hierarchical structure of the Young Schema Questionnaire. The current analysis identified a two-factor structure to the schema questionnaire, rather than the previously stated 5-factors. Having demonstrated the usefulness of understanding psychopathy and narcissism in cognitive-interpersonal terms, the second study sought to further clarify the association between psychopathy and narcissism through the reconceptualisation of these constructs in cognitive terms, through the identification of the cognitive distortions operative in each disorder. One hundred and thirty two participants completed a cognitive distortions questionnaire developed by the author, along with the same measures of primary and secondary psychopathy, and overt and covert narcissism, as those administered in study 1. Findings were interpreted as providing support for the notion of psychopathy representing a sub-category of narcissism. Findings also provide further supportive evidence for the validity of the primary / secondary psychopathy, and overt / covert narcissism distinctions. The further clarification of the factor structure of the Young Schema Questionnaire, and the replication of the reliability and construct validity of the measure of cognitive distortions developed for this research are highlighted as areas for future research.

Borderline Personality Disorder (BPD) is a major health problem and is associated with considerable psychosocial distress and impairment, resulting in a high degree of morbidity and a significant impact on the mental health system. Patients with BPD are difficult to treat clinically, the main issue being engaging the patient and then maintaining the relationship. Patients with BPD constitute 10-20% of psychiatric inpatients, utilise a large amount of mental health resources and have a 10% successful suicide rate. Therefore, it is essential that attention is given to improving effectiveness of treatment approaches for patients with BPD, including engagement. The purpose of the study was to explore and describe the lived world of patients with BPD in order to develop supporting guidelines to improve non-compliance of patients with BPD. The objective of the study was to develop guidelines to improve compliance, which is expected to minimise self-harm risks and improve the quality of the patients’ lives. A qualitative, phenomenological methodology was chosen because it is particularly well suited to study human experiences of health (LoBiondo-Wood & Haber, 2011:141). It is a design that emphasizes discovery through interpreting meaning as opposed to quantification and prediction. Understanding and interpretation of data was thus the hallmark of the research design. This phenomenological study examined human experiences through the descriptions provided by the people involved, i.e. lived experiences. Data collection was done using recorded interviews guided by a semi-structured interview schedule. Memos collected during interviews supplemented the data. Data analysis was hallmarked by constant comparison, contextualisation and description of emerging themes. The main findings, described in three main themes, were the importance of the relationship with the clinician, the overwhelming feelings experienced by the patients and the sense of futility in treatment. These were all linked to the lack of hope the patient felt regarding their clinician, ever being able to manage their continuously oscillating emotions and the purpose of treatment. The findings led to the construction of guidelines to foster initial and continued engagement in treatment with patients with BPD. The guidelines covered issues of clinical practice and management input. / Health Studies / D. Litt. et Phil. (Health Studies)

Bakgrund: Patienter med emotionell instabil personlighetsstörning upplevs som en svårbehandlad patientgrupp inom heldygnsvården. Omvårdnadspersonalens kunskap kring bemötande och behandling av denna patientgrupp är varierande vilket gör att vården ser olika ut. Detta kan resultera i ett ökat lidande hos patienten och frustration i personalgruppen. Syfte: Studiens syfte var att beskriva faktorer som bidrar till stabilare mående hos patienter med emotionellt instabilt personlighetsstörning under heldygnsvård. Metod: Som metod har använts en kvalitativ design med induktiv ansats. Studien baserades på sex intervjuer där informanterna var patienter med diagnosen emotionellt instabil personlighetsstörning. Intervjuerna analyserades med hjälp av kvalitativ innehållsanalys. Resultat: Resultatet visade att bemötandet och engagemang hos personal var av stor vikt. Struktur och delaktighet var andra viktiga faktorer för att nå ett stabilare mående. Det framkom att heldygnsvården kunde bidra med ett avbrott i vardagen och att meningsfulla aktiviteter under vårdtiden var en annan viktig faktor. Slutsats: Patienterna upplevde att bli bemött som en individ av engagerad personal och att få vara delaktig i sin vård som två viktiga faktorer i processen mot ett stabilare mående. Heldygnsvårdens struktur och miljöombytet stod för återhämtning och en möjlighet att återfå rutiner. Det framkom även en önskan om fler meningsfulla aktiviteter såsom fysisk aktivitet och psykoedukation för att på bästa sätt ta tillvara på vårdtiden. / Background: Patients with emotional unstable personality disorder is experienced as a difficult to treat patient population in inpatient care. Nursing staff knowledge surrounding the introduction and the treatment of this patient population is diverse, which means that the care is different. This can result in increased suffering of the patient and frustration in the staff group. Aim: The aim of the study was to describe factors that contribute to a more stable mood in patients with emotionally unstable personality disorder. Method: The method that has been used is a qualitative design with inductive approach. The study was based on six interviews with informants that who were patients diagnosed with emotionally unstable personality disorder. The interviews were analyzed using content analysis. Result: The results showed that the hospitality and commitment of the staff was of great importance. Structure and participation were other important factors for achieving a stable mood. It was revealed that inpatient care could contribute to an interruption of everyday life and meaningful activities were another important factor that emerged. Conclusion: Patients experienced to be treated as an individual by committed staff and to be involved in their care was part of the process towards a stable mood. Inpatient care structure and change of environment support for recovery and an opportunity to regain routines. There was a desire for more meaningful activities such as physical activity and psycho education to best take advantage of the period of care

Section 1. Literature Review. Methodological limitations in the existing research are discussed and future research ideas are proposed to enable a more holistic understanding of direct care staff's experiences.;Section 2. Research Report. The aim was to explore the experiences of staff who have worked with learning disabled patients who also have a diagnosed borderline personality disorder. A free association narrative interview approach was used to analyse the accounts of eight direct care staff (Hollway and Jefferson, 2000). Working with patients who have a learning disability and a diagnosed borderline personality disorder is emotionally demanding. Participants did not appear comfortable in sharing their personal emotional experiences. It was thought this was because these were very painful and staff were concerned they would be criticised for voicing negative feelings about these patients. Staff appeared to manage their painful emotional experiences of their work by using a number of psychological defence mechanisms. These included projecting and expressing their negative feelings onto the organisation, and/or by trying to forget and repress these negative experiences. Organisational factors can be problematic and need to be addressed to reduce the obstacles staff experience in their work with patients who have a learning disability and also a borderline personality disorder. However, when staff comment upon these organisational factors they may also be indirectly expressing the emotional impact these patients are having upon them. Once the organisational factors have been addressed staff may begin to feel more supported and safe enough to explore the painful emotional reactions they have experienced in their work with their patients without the fear of being criticised by others.

Background: Patients with borderline personality disorder represent a large group in healthcare who are struggling with painful emotions in life. Caring should be based on strengthening health processes by focusing on the patients, but research made by the patient's perspective has shown that this population rather felt that their health processes was counteracted, than promoted. The patients felt that the nurses displayed a negative attitude towards them. Attitudes are defined as a system of values, emotions and actions towards others.   Aim: the purpose of this study was to highlight the attitudes and experiences of nurses towards caring for people with borderline personality disorder   Methods: A study on the literature based on nine scientific papers was performed. The articles have been analyzed, systematically coded and compiled into a new unit.   Results: This study shows that nurses have an overall negative attitude towards patients with borderline personality disorder. Three main categories emerged, which was lack of knowledge, difficult patients and experiences influence. The nurses expressed the lack of knowledge as a feeling of not being competent enough to provide the right care and because of the fact that they had little faith in the care options that existed. Difficult patients was the biggest theme which showed that patients were seen as strong, dangerous ruthless forces that evokes powerlessness among nurses. Something that was seen as consistent throughout the study was that the patients were seen as dishonest and manipulative. The third main theme ”experiences influence” showed that experiences affects and touches the nurse that then contributes to the selection of treatment strategies.   Discussions: It appears that there is a gap between nurses' attitudes and the needs of patients resulting in health suffering. This is discussed by Katie Erikson's theory of care suffering from nursing science theory of health and care, patients 'and nurses' views on health promotion.   Keywords: Borderline personality disorder, experiences, attitudes, nursing, nurse, nurses.