中华行为医学与脑科学杂志
中華行為醫學與腦科學雜誌
중화행위의학여뇌과학잡지
CHINESE JOURNAL OF BEHAVIORAL MEDICINE AND BRAIN SCIENCE
2011年
5期
424-427
,共4页
崔立谦%陈壮飞%蒋莉君%邓伟%黄朝华%李名立%王强%马小红%李涛
崔立謙%陳壯飛%蔣莉君%鄧偉%黃朝華%李名立%王彊%馬小紅%李濤
최립겸%진장비%장리군%산위%황조화%리명립%왕강%마소홍%리도
精神分裂症%双相障碍%剑桥神经心理自动化成套测试%认知功能
精神分裂癥%雙相障礙%劍橋神經心理自動化成套測試%認知功能
정신분렬증%쌍상장애%검교신경심리자동화성투측시%인지공능
Schizophrenia%Bipolar disorder%Cambridge neuropsychological test automated battery%Cognitive function
目的 使用剑桥神经心理自动化成套测试(CANTAB)对偏执型精神分裂症与双相躁狂患者认知功能进行比较研究,为寻找认知内表型指标提供线索.方法 采用韦氏智力测试7项简版和CANTAB中的6项分测验对35例未服药、急性期偏执型精神分裂症患者、35例双相躁狂患者和30例正常对照进行测试,通过控制或不控制IQ对认知指标进行方差分析.结果 3组被试在CANTAB 6个分测验中的15个指标中有13个指标差异有显著性(F=4.71~26.71,P=0.011~0.001),两两比较显示精神分裂症和双相躁狂组13个指标皆显著差于正常组(P<0.05),而两患者组之间无差异(P>0.05).控制IQ后,精神分裂症组、双相躁狂组、正常对照组空间工作记忆(SWM)分测验中的策略分[(36.8±3.56)分、(37.24±4.21)分、(30.33±6.24)分]、组间搜索错误数[(4|D.86±19.97)次、(40.24±18.92)次、(15.4±17.22)次];快速视觉信息处理(RVP)测验中的正确率(0.54±0.18、0.56±0.15、0.78±0.17);内外纬度转换(IED)测验中的外维转换期错误数[(12.43±9.96)次、(13.18±8.98)次、(4.97±6.09)次]、总错误数(已校正)[(45.26±36.36)次、(46.61±33.32)次、(14 ± 11.7)次]共5项指标3组之间差异有显著性.两两比较显示精神分裂症和双相躁狂组5项指标皆显著差于正常组(P<0.05),而两患者组之间差异无显著性(P>0.05).其余7项指标3组之间差异无显著性.双相情感障碍患者中YMRS评分与SWM测试的组间错误呈正相关(r=0.38,P=0.039).结论 无论控制IQ与否,两组患者CANTAB认知功能测试的损害模式相似.患者组独立于IQ的受损认知指标可作为认知内表型的候选.
目的 使用劍橋神經心理自動化成套測試(CANTAB)對偏執型精神分裂癥與雙相躁狂患者認知功能進行比較研究,為尋找認知內錶型指標提供線索.方法 採用韋氏智力測試7項簡版和CANTAB中的6項分測驗對35例未服藥、急性期偏執型精神分裂癥患者、35例雙相躁狂患者和30例正常對照進行測試,通過控製或不控製IQ對認知指標進行方差分析.結果 3組被試在CANTAB 6箇分測驗中的15箇指標中有13箇指標差異有顯著性(F=4.71~26.71,P=0.011~0.001),兩兩比較顯示精神分裂癥和雙相躁狂組13箇指標皆顯著差于正常組(P<0.05),而兩患者組之間無差異(P>0.05).控製IQ後,精神分裂癥組、雙相躁狂組、正常對照組空間工作記憶(SWM)分測驗中的策略分[(36.8±3.56)分、(37.24±4.21)分、(30.33±6.24)分]、組間搜索錯誤數[(4|D.86±19.97)次、(40.24±18.92)次、(15.4±17.22)次];快速視覺信息處理(RVP)測驗中的正確率(0.54±0.18、0.56±0.15、0.78±0.17);內外緯度轉換(IED)測驗中的外維轉換期錯誤數[(12.43±9.96)次、(13.18±8.98)次、(4.97±6.09)次]、總錯誤數(已校正)[(45.26±36.36)次、(46.61±33.32)次、(14 ± 11.7)次]共5項指標3組之間差異有顯著性.兩兩比較顯示精神分裂癥和雙相躁狂組5項指標皆顯著差于正常組(P<0.05),而兩患者組之間差異無顯著性(P>0.05).其餘7項指標3組之間差異無顯著性.雙相情感障礙患者中YMRS評分與SWM測試的組間錯誤呈正相關(r=0.38,P=0.039).結論 無論控製IQ與否,兩組患者CANTAB認知功能測試的損害模式相似.患者組獨立于IQ的受損認知指標可作為認知內錶型的候選.
목적 사용검교신경심리자동화성투측시(CANTAB)대편집형정신분렬증여쌍상조광환자인지공능진행비교연구,위심조인지내표형지표제공선색.방법 채용위씨지력측시7항간판화CANTAB중적6항분측험대35례미복약、급성기편집형정신분렬증환자、35례쌍상조광환자화30례정상대조진행측시,통과공제혹불공제IQ대인지지표진행방차분석.결과 3조피시재CANTAB 6개분측험중적15개지표중유13개지표차이유현저성(F=4.71~26.71,P=0.011~0.001),량량비교현시정신분렬증화쌍상조광조13개지표개현저차우정상조(P<0.05),이량환자조지간무차이(P>0.05).공제IQ후,정신분렬증조、쌍상조광조、정상대조조공간공작기억(SWM)분측험중적책략분[(36.8±3.56)분、(37.24±4.21)분、(30.33±6.24)분]、조간수색착오수[(4|D.86±19.97)차、(40.24±18.92)차、(15.4±17.22)차];쾌속시각신식처리(RVP)측험중적정학솔(0.54±0.18、0.56±0.15、0.78±0.17);내외위도전환(IED)측험중적외유전환기착오수[(12.43±9.96)차、(13.18±8.98)차、(4.97±6.09)차]、총착오수(이교정)[(45.26±36.36)차、(46.61±33.32)차、(14 ± 11.7)차]공5항지표3조지간차이유현저성.량량비교현시정신분렬증화쌍상조광조5항지표개현저차우정상조(P<0.05),이량환자조지간차이무현저성(P>0.05).기여7항지표3조지간차이무현저성.쌍상정감장애환자중YMRS평분여SWM측시적조간착오정정상관(r=0.38,P=0.039).결론 무론공제IQ여부,량조환자CANTAB인지공능측시적손해모식상사.환자조독립우IQ적수손인지지표가작위인지내표형적후선.
Objective To detect the patterns of cognitive impairment between patients with paranoid schizophrenia and patients with bipolar mania by using the Cambridge Neuropsychological Test Automated Battery (CANTAB) ,and to explore research clues for finding of cognitive endophenotype in patients with paranoid schizophrenia or bipolar mania. Methods Six CANTAB subtests and the seven subtests of the Wechsler Abbreviated Scale of Intelligence (WAIS short form) were administered to 35 patients with paranoid schizophrenia and 33 patients with bipolar mania who were drug naive experiencing an acute episode, as well as 30 healthy controls. Results Patients with paranoid schizophrenia and bipolar mania demonstrated impairments in 13 of the 15 cognitive indicators in CANTAB. After controlling IQ, both patient groups remained as significantly different from normal controls in terms of search strategy(36. 8 ±3.56,37.24 ±4. 21,30. 33 ±6.24) ,between-search errors(40. 86 ± 19.97,40.24 ± 18.92,15.4 ±17.22) on the SWM test,the proportion of hits(0.54 ±0. 18,0.56 ±0.15,0.78 ± 0.17) on the RVIP test,total errors(45.26 ±36.36,46.61 ±33.32,14 ± 11.7) and EDS errors (12.43 ±9.96, 13.18 ±8.98,4.97 ±6.09)on the IED test. Between search error in the SWM test was positively correlation with YMRS scores ( r=0.38, P=0.039) in bipolar patients. Conclusion Both patient groups demonstrated a comparable profile of cognitive impairments during active periods of their condition. The cognitive impairment index may be a discreet cognitive endophenotype overlapping the disorders.