节点文献

执行功能行为评定量表成人版和执行功能失常问卷在抑郁患者生态学执行功能评估中的应用

Use of the Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function-Adult Version and Dysexecutive Questionnaire in evaluating ecological executive function in depressive patients

  • 推荐 CAJ下载
  • PDF下载
  • 不支持迅雷等下载工具,请取消加速工具后下载。

【作者】 刘粹黄成兵王玉凤

【Author】 LIU Cui,HUANG Cheng-Bing,WANG Yu-Feng Peking University Institute of Mental Health,Key Laboratory of Ministry of Health(Peking University),Beijing 100191,China

【机构】 北京大学精神卫生研究所,卫生部精神卫生学重点实验室(北京大学)北京大学精神卫生研究所江苏省淮安市第三人民医院

【摘要】 目的:研究执行功能行为评定量表成人版(BRIEF-A)和执行功能失常问卷(DEX)在抑郁患者生态学执行功能评估中的适用性和相关性。方法:纳入符合国际疾病和相关健康问题分类第十版(ICD-10)诊断的抑郁发作患者74例,正常对照45例。分别由精神科专业人员使用BRIEF-A和DEX进行评估。结果:抑郁患者BRIEF-A总分[(128.7±27.8)vs.(86.3±18.4)]及抑制[(14.1±3.3)vs.(9.7±1.7)]、转换[(12.1±2.8)vs.(7.8±1.9)]、感情控制[(19.5±4.6)vs.(13.3±4.0)]、自我监控[(9.8±2.8)vs.(7.4±1.6)]、任务启动[(15.8±4.2)vs.(9.9±2.2)]、工作记忆[(15.1±3.5)vs.(9.9±2.2)]、计划[(18.6±4.9)vs.(12.7±3.0)]、组织[(11.5±3.4)vs.(9.9±2.1)]和任务监控[(12.4±4.0)vs.(7.8±2.1)]等9个因子得分均高于对照(均P<0.05)。抑郁患者DEX的抑制[4(0~17)vs.0(0~6)]、意向性行为[7(0~16)vs.2(0~8)]、思想与行为不一致[5(0~16)vs.1(0~9)]、思想与行为障碍[3.5(0~11)vs.1(0~7)]和社交行为调节因子[3(0~8)vs.1(0~4)]得分均高于正常对照(均P<0.05)。BRIEF-A的总分和各因子分与DEX的总分和各因子分之间均呈正相关(r=0.37~0.80,均P<0.01)。结论:执行功能行为评定量表成人版和执行功能失常问卷在评估抑郁患者生态学执行功能损害中具有较高的敏感度,均适用于抑郁发作的人群。执行功能失常问卷较适用于初步测查,执行功能行为评定量表成人版较适用于全面检查和评估。

【Abstract】 Objective:To explore the applicability of the Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function-Adult Version(BRIEF-A) and the Dysexecutive Questionnaire(DEX) in evaluating the ecological executive function profile in depressive patients.Methods:Totally 74 inpatients who were diagnosed as depressive episode according to the International Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems,Tenth Revision(ICD-10) criteria and 45 age-gender-matched normal adults were recruited.All the subjects completed the BRIEF-A and the DEX.Results:Compared with the normal adults,the patients got significantly higher scores on all subscales of the BRIEF-A respectively(Ps<0.05),including total score [(128.7±27.8)vs.(86.3±18.4)],inhibition[(14.1±3.3)vs.(9.7±1.7)],shifting[(12.1±2.8)vs.(7.8±1.9)],emotion control[(19.5±4.6)vs.(13.3±4.0)],self-monitoring [(9.8±2.8)vs.(7.4±1.6)],initiation[(15.8±4.2)vs.(9.9±2.2)],working memory[(15.1±3.5)vs.(9.9±2.2)],planning[(18.6±4.9)vs.(12.7±3.0)],organization[(11.5±3.4)vs.(9.9±2.1)],monitoring [(12.4±4.0) vs.(7.8±2.1)],behavioral regulation index(BRI),metacognition index(MI) and global executive composite(GEC).Compared with the normal adults,the patients got significantly higher scores on all subscales of the DEX respectively(Z=4.65~7.31,P’ s<0.05),including inhibition [4(0~17) vs.0(0~6)],intentionality [7(0~16) vs.2(0~8)],knowing-doing dissociation [5(0~16) vs.1(0~9)],in-resistance [3.5(0~11) vs.1(0~7),social regulation [3(0~8) vs.1(0~4)].Spearman correlation test showed that all subscales of the BRIEF-A were positively correlated with all subscales of the DEX,respectively(r=0.37-0.80,P<0.01).Conclusion:It indicates that the Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function-Adult Version and the Dysexecutive Questionnaire may have high correlations in evaluating the ecological executive function impairments in depressive patients.

【基金】 “十一五”国家科技支撑计划资助(2007BAI17B03),“十一五”国家科技支撑计划资助(2007BAI17B05);卫生行业科研专项经费资助(200802073)
  • 【文献出处】 中国心理卫生杂志 ,Chinese Mental Health Journal , 编辑部邮箱 ,2013年03期
  • 【分类号】R749.4
  • 【被引频次】17
  • 【下载频次】1183
节点文献中: 

本文链接的文献网络图示:

本文的引文网络