Self-reported impulsivity in women with borderline personality disorder: the role of childhood maltreatment severity and emotion regulation difficulties

Krause-Utz, Annegret; Erol, Ezgi; Brousianou, Athina V.; Cackowski, Sylvia; Paret, Christian; Ende, Gabriele; Elzinga, Bernet

doi:10.1186/s40479-019-0101-8

Borderline Personality Disorder and Emotion Dysregulation

Table 2 Descriptive values for scores on Impulsivity (UPPS Impulsive Behaviour Scale), Emotion Regulation Difficulties (Difficulties in Emotion Regulation Scale) and Childhood Maltreatment Severity (Childhood Trauma Questionnaire) in patients with Borderline Personality Disorder (BPD), Clinical Controls (CC) and Healthy Controls (HC) and results of the MANOVA

From: Self-reported impulsivity in women with borderline personality disorder: the role of childhood maltreatment severity and emotion regulation difficulties

Variable	BPD (n = 55)	CC (n = 54)	HC (n = 58)	Group statistics
UPPS Impulsive Behaviour Scale
UPPS Negative Urgency	2.67 ± 0.87	2.83 ± 0.55	0.22 ± 0.06	F_{(2, 164)} = 350.27, p < 0.001, η²_(part) = 0.81 BPD vs. CC: − 0.17 ± 0.11, 95% CI [− 0.43, 0.10] BPD vs. HC: 2.45 ± 0.11^*, 95% CI [2.19, 2.72] CC vs. HC:* 2.62 ± 0.11^**, 95% CI [2.36, 2.88]
UPPS Premeditation	2.23 ± 0.50	2.45 ± 0.55	0.18 ± 0.03	F_{(2, 164)} = 494.70, p < 0.001, η²_(part) = 0.86 BPD vs. CC: − 0.22 ± 0.08^, 95% CI [− 0.42, − 0.03] BPD* vs. HC: 2.05 ± 0.08^*, 95% CI [1.86, 2.24] CC vs. HC:* 2.27 ± 0.08^**, 95% CI [2.09, 2.46]
UPPS Perseverance	2.40 ± 0.64	2.58 ± 0.45	0.25 ± 0.05	F_{(2, 164)} = 474.22, p < 0.001, η²_(part) = 0.85 BPD vs. CC: − 0.18 ± 0.09, 95% CI [− 0.38, 0.02] BPD vs. HC: 2.15 ± 0.08^*, 95% CI [1.95, 2.34] CC vs. HC:* 2.32 ± 0.08^**, 95% CI [2.12, 2.52]
UPPS Sensation Seeking	3.02 ± 0.83	2.74 ± 0.69	0.17 ± 0.04	F_{(2, 164)} = 372.40, p < 0.001, η²_(part) = 0.82 BPD vs. CC: 0.27 ± 0.12, 95% CI [− 0.01, 0.55] BPD vs. HC: 2.85 ± 0.12^*, 95% CI [2.58, 3.12] CC vs. HC:* 2.58 ± 0.12^**, 95% CI [2.30, 2.85]
Difficulties in Emotion Regulation Scale
DERS Clarity	12.60 ± 4.81	12.81 ± 4.87	8.12 ± 2.58	F_{(2, 164)} = 22.66, p < 0.001, η²_(part) = 0.22 BPD vs. CC: − 0.21 ± 0.80, 95% CI [− 2.12, 1.69] BPD vs. HC: 4.48 ± 0.79^**, 95% CI [2.61, 6.35] CC vs. HC:* 4.69 ± 0.79^***, 95% CI [2.82, 6.57]
DERS Regulation strategies	21.89 ± 8.03	21.30 ± 7.09	11.84 ± 3.80	F_{(2, 164)} = 42.45, p < 0.001, η²_(part) = 0.34 BPD vs. CC: 0.59 ± 1.25, 95% CI [− 2.36, 3.55] BPD vs. HC: 10.05 ± 1.23^**, 95% CI [7.14, 12.95] CC vs. HC:* 9.45 ± 1.23^***, 95% CI [6.54, 12.37]
DERS Awareness	16.25 ± 4.96	15.53 ± 3.62	16.88 ± 3.62	F_{(2, 164)} = 1.49, p = 0.23, η²_(part) = 0.02 BPD vs. CC: 0.72 ± 0.79, 95% CI [− 1.14, 2.58] BPD vs. HC: − 0.62 ± 0.77, 95% CI [− 2.45, 1.20] CC vs. HC: − 1.34 ± 0.78, 95% CI [− 3.18, 0.50]
DERS Control	18.05 ± 5.35	14.41 ± 5.30	11.09 ± 2.81	F_{(2, 164)} = 32.28, p < 0.001, η²_(part) = 0.28 BPD vs. CC: 3.65 ± 0.88^**, 95% CI [1.56, 5.74] BPD* vs. HC: 6.97 ± 0.87^**, 95% CI [4.92, 9.02] CC vs. HC:* 3.32 ± 0.87^**, 95% CI [1.26, 5.38]
DERS Goals	12.04 ± 5.66	12.69 ± 4.94	11.33 ± 4.25	F_{(2, 164)} = 1.04, p = 0.35, η²_(part) = 0.01 BPD vs. CC: − 0.65 ± 0.95, 95% CI [− 2.90, 1.60] BPD vs. HC: 0.71 ± 0.94, 95% CI [− 1.51, 2.92] CC vs. HC: 1.36 ± 0.94, 95% CI [− 0.87, 3.58]
DERS Acceptance	16.35 ± 6.76	15.56 ± 6.52	10.36 ± 3.40	F_{(2, 164)} = 18.31, p < 0.001, η²_(part) = 0.18 BPD vs. CC: 0.79 ± 1.10, 95% CI [− 1.80, 3.38] BPD vs. HC: 5.98 ± 1.08^**, 95% CI [3.43, 8.53] CC vs. HC:* 5.19 ± 1.08^***, 95% CI [2.63, 7.75]
Childhood Trauma Questionnaire
CTQ Emotional Abuse	17.53 ± 6.12	10.46 ± 5.11	5.95 ± 1.28	F_{(2, 164)} = 89.80, p < 0.001, η²_(part) = 0.52 BPD vs. CC: 7.06 ± 0.88^, 95% CI [− 4.97, 9.16] BPD* vs. HC: 11.58 ± 0.87^, 95% CI [9.52, 13.63] CC vs. HC:* 4.51 ± 0.87^*, 95% CI [2.45, 6.58]
CTQ Emotional Neglect	17.45 ± 5.86	11.70 ± 4.91	6.95 ± 2.37	F_{(2, 164)} = 74.14, p < 0.001, η²_(part) = 0.48 BPD vs. CC: 5.75 ± 0.88^, 95% CI [− 3.67, 7.83] BPD* vs. HC: 10.51 ± 0.86^, 95% CI [8.46, 12.55] CC vs. HC:* 4.76 ± 0.87^*, 95% CI [2.70, 6.81]
CTQ Physical Abuse	9.85 ± 5.09	6.59 ± 2.87	5.16 ± 0.62	F_{(2, 164)} = 28.72, p < 0.001, η²_(part) = 0.26 BPD vs. CC: 3.26 ± 0.64^, 95% CI [1.74, 4.79] BPD* vs. HC: 4.70 ± 0.63^, 95% CI [3.20, 6.20] CC vs. HC:* 1.44 ± 0.64, 95% CI [− 0.07, 2.94]
CTQ Physical Neglect	10.49 ± 3.88	6.98 ± 2.57	6.29 ± 1.75	F_{(2, 164)} = 34.63, p < 0.001, η²_(part) = 0.30 BPD vs. CC: 3.51 ± 0.55^, 95% CI [2.22, 4.80] BPD* vs. HC: 4.20 ± 0.54^, 95% CI [2.93, 5.47] CC vs. HC:* 0.69 ± 0.54, 95% CI [− 0.59, 1.97]
CTQ Sexual Abuse	11.55 ± 6.62	6.78 ± 4.03	5.33 ± 1.23	F_{(2, 164)} = 29.24, p < 0.001, η²_(part) = 0.26 BPD vs. CC: 4.77 ± 0.86^, 95% CI [2.73, 6.81] BPD* vs. HC: 6.22 ± 0.85^, 95% CI [4.22, 8.22] CC vs. HC:* 1.45 ± 0.85, 95% CI [− 0.56, 3.46]

Table shows means ± standard deviations of scores and results of the multivariate analysis of variance, with post-hoc Tuckey tests
BPD Borderline Personality Disorder (patient group), CC Clinical Control group consisting by ADHD and SUD, CTQ Childhood Trauma Questionnaire, DERS Difficulties in Emotion Regulation Scale, HC Healthy control group, UPPS UPPS Impulsive Behaviour Scale
*p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001

Back to article page

ISSN: 2051-6673

Contact us

General enquiries: journalsubmissions@springernature.com