الفهرس 
IntroductionOnly 14 pages are availabe for public view
 |  | from | 278 |  |  |
| | | from | 278 | | |
Abstract
1.The aims of the study:
I- Examining the role of BPD psychopathology (in the form of child abuse and defensive style) on the form and severity of associated dissociative phenomena.
Hypothesis1(a): Previous psychological trauma specifically child abuse and neglect associated with increased prevalence and severity of dissociation in BPD. Hypothesis1(b):The defensive styleof BPD hasan effect onassociated dissociative phenomena.
II- Examining the effect of BPD illness characteristics and severity variables on form and severity of associated dissociative phenomena.
Hypothesis2 (a): The BPD illness characteristics and severity variableshave an effect on the type of associated dissociation.
Hypothesis2 (b): The BPD illness characteristics and severity variables have an effect on severity of associated dissociation.
EEG status in BPD:
In the current study, 51 of our 60 patients went through EEG assessment. The study of their EEG records showed that13.7% had epileptiform EEG changes while the remaining patients (86.3%) had non epilptiform EEG record (68.6% with normal EEG record, 13.7% with nonspecific EEG changes, and only 3.9% with non-significant EEG changes).
Concerning the comparison of BPD with epileptiform EEG changes and BPD with non epilptiform EEG changes regarding variables of DES factors of dissociation, it was found that amnesia factor was lower in patients with epileptiform EEG changes, while absorption, depersonalization and total score of DES were higher in patients with epileptiform EEG changes. However, these results were not statistically significant.
Borderline patients with epileptiform EEG changes had higher figures regarding subscale A, B, and total score of DES than those without such changes. The reverse was the case for subscale C (subscale of positive behaviors), but these comparisons were not statistically significant.
Data analysis:
Data were analyzed using the statistical program for sciences-19 (SPSS-19).Frequencies and percentages were calculated for categorical variables while mean and standard deviation were calculated for continuous variables. T-tests were used to compare groups on continuous variables while Chi square tests were used on categorical variables. Cut off value of significance (p value) was considered at less than 0.05.
Conclusions
1.Dissociative phenomena (including dissociative experiences and dissociative symptoms) are commonly comorbid with BPD.
2.Dissociative phenomena present inBPD vary in presentation and severity from patient to another.
3.Patients with BPD more frequently to have at least another comorbid PD in addition to BPD.
4.Neurotic defenses are the most commonly used defenses by borderline patients, followed by immature defenses and finally the least used are the mature defenses.
5. Defensive style of BPD affects presentation and severity of associated dissociative phenomena.
6.Borderline patients frequently experience exposure to trauma and neglect as children, especially physical and emotional neglect.
7.Reported history of child trauma (especially child abuse) in patients with BPD has a significant effect on presentation and severity of associated dissociation.
8.Severity of BPD (as measured by number of DSM-IV criteria, number of comorbid other personality disorders, and severity of emotional and behavioral disturbance) affect presentation and severity of associated dissociation.