Personality Disorder and Physical Health Comorbidities: A Link With Bone Health?

We examined whether personality disorders (PDs) (any, cluster A/B/C) were associated with bone mineral density (BMD) in a population-based sample of Australian women (n = 696). Personality and mood disorders were assessed using semi-structured diagnostic interviews. BMD was measured at the spine, hip, and total body using dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (GE-Lunar Prodigy). Anthropometrics, medication use, physical conditions, and lifestyle factors were documented. The association between PDs (any, cluster A/B/C) and BMD (spine/hip/total body) was examined with multiple linear regression models. The best models were identified by backward elimination including age, weight, physical activity, smoking status, alcohol consumption, dietary calcium intake, mood disorders, physical multimorbidity, socioeconomic status, and medications affecting bone. The variables were retained in the model if p < 0.05. All potential interactions in final models were tested. Those with cluster A PD, compared to those without, had 6.7% lower hip BMD [age, weight adjusted mean 0.853 (95% CI 0.803–0.903) vs. 0.910 (95% CI 0.901–0.919) g/cm2, p = 0.027] and 3.4% lower total body BMD [age, weight, smoking, alcohol, calcium adjusted mean 1.102 (95% CI 1.064–1.140) vs. 1.139 (95% CI 1.128–1.150) g/cm2, p = 0.056]. No associations were observed between cluster B/C PDs and hip/total body BMD or between any of the PD clusters and spine BMD. To our knowledge, this study is the first to investigate the bone health of women with PD in a population-based sample. Given the paucity of literature, replication and longitudinal research including the examination of underlying mechanisms and sex differences are warranted

A systematic review of personality and musculoskeletal disorders: evidence from general population studies

IntroductionWe conducted a systematic review to evaluate the quality and extent of evidence on associations between personality disorders (PDs) and musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) in population-based studies, since these disorders are leading causes of disease burden worldwide.MethodsA search strategy of published, peer-reviewed and gray literature was developed in consultation with a liaison librarian and implemented for Embase, CINAHL Complete, Medline Complete, and PsycINFO via the EBSCOhost platform from 1990 to the present and CORDIS and ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global, respectively. The inclusion criteria were as follows: I) general population participants aged ≥15 years; II) self-report, probable PD based on positive screen, or threshold PD according to the DSM-IV/5 (groupings: any, Clusters A/B/C, specific PD) or ICD-10/11; III) MSDs identified by self-report or ICD criteria (arthritis, back/neck conditions, fibromyalgia, osteopenia/osteoporosis) and III) cohort, case-control, and cross-sectional study designs. Two reviewers independently screened articles and extracted the data. Critical appraisal was undertaken using the Joanna Briggs Institute checklists for systematic reviews of etiology and risk. A descriptive synthesis presents the characteristics of included studies, critical appraisal results, and descriptions of the main findings. This review adhered to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines.ResultsThere were 11 peer-reviewed, published articles included in this review (n = 9 cross-sectional and n = 2 case-control studies); participants were ≥18 years in these studies. No published gray literature was identified. Semi-structured interviews were the most common method to ascertain PDs; all studies utilized self-reported measures to identify MSDs. Overall, we detected limited and conflicting evidence for associations between PDs and MSDs.DiscussionThe main result may be explained by lack of population-based longitudinal evidence, heterogenous groupings of PD, and few comparable cross-sectional and case-control studies. Strengths of the review include a comprehensive search strategy and a discussion of mechanisms underlying possible associations between PDs and MSDs.ConclusionsThe quality of most studies included in this review that examined associations between PD and MSDs in general population adults was high. However, the results demonstrated limited and conflicting evidence for these associations, in part, due to lack of comparable evidence, which should be addressed in future research.Systematic review registrationhttps://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier CRD42021243094

Associations between personality and musculoskeletal disorders in the general population: A systematic review protocol

There is growing evidence of the comorbidity between personality disorder (PD) and musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs). However, there are no systematic reviews including critical appraisal and meta-analyses that identify, evaluate, and synthesize the available evidence on these associations. Therefore, we present here a protocol of the methodology to undertake a systematic review, with the objective to evaluate associations between PD and MSDs in epidemiological population-based studies. A systematic review of observational studies will be conducted. A complete search strategy will be developed in consultation with a health librarian. To identify peer-reviewed literature, the search will be translated for, and implemented in Medline Complete, CINAHL Complete, and PsycINFO via the EBSCOhost platform from 1990 to the present. Gray literature will be identified. Studies will be eligible if they examine general population participants aged 15 years and over. Associations of interest are the presence of threshold or positive screen according to the DSM-V/5 (groupings: any, Clusters A, B, C, specific PD) or ICD-10 for PD in relation to arthritis, back/neck conditions, fibromyalgia, osteopenia/osteoporosis, and/or “any” of these MSDs. Data extraction and critical appraisal will be conducted in line with the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) guidance for systematic reviews of etiology and risk. The results from all studies will be presented in tables, text, and figures. A descriptive synthesis will present the characteristics of included studies, critical appraisal results, and descriptions of the main findings. Where appropriate, meta-analyses will be performed. If heterogeneity (e.g., I2 = 50%) is detected, subgroup/sensitivity analysis may be used to explore the possible sources. The systematic review does not require ethics approval. The proposed systematic review will strengthen the evidence base on what is known regarding associations between PD and MSDs by identifying, evaluating, and synthesizing the findings of existing observational studies including meta-analyses, where appropriate