论文部分内容阅读
目的:探索精神病临床高危综合征人群、首发精神病患者和健康对照在情绪识别过程中的耗时和准确率的特征。方法:2015～2017年经前驱期综合征结构式访谈(structured interview for prodromalsyndromes，SIPS)临床访谈后入组临床高危人群50例，经定式临床访谈诊断表(structured clinical interview for DSM-5，SCID)诊断入组首发未服药的精神病患者50例，同时招募健康对照50例。以情绪的眼神图片为线索，结合认知功能变量，自编基于电脑化的评估和时间记录系统，比较三组间情绪识别准确率及其耗时性特征。使用SPSS 17.0进行统计分析，三组样本的情绪识别准确率和耗时特征采用one-way ANOVA分析，两两比较采用LSD检验，对三组被试的情绪识别准确率和耗时特征进行Pearson相关分析。结果:(1)高危人群组[(65.1±10.4)%]、健康对照组[(72.5±6.6)%]和首发患者[(50.3±21.6)%]在眼神阅读准确率上，差异有统计学意义(n P<0.05)；进一步两两比较，高危人群和首发患者眼神阅读准确率均低于健康对照组，首发患者眼神阅读准确率低于高危人群(均n P<0.05)。在眼神性别判断准确率上，三组差异有统计学意义[(80.6±26.0)%，(92.7±3.7)%，(91.8±4.4)%](n P<0.05)；进一步两两比较，首发患者眼神性别判断准确率低于健康对照组和高危人群(均n P<0.05)。(2)高危人群组[(12.4 ±11.2)s]、健康对照组[(6.9 ±1.7)s]和首发组[(10.3 ±6.0)s]在眼神阅读耗时上，差异有统计学意义(n P<0.05)；进一步两两比较，高危人群眼神阅读耗时高于健康对照组(n P<0.05)；在眼神性别判断耗时上，三组差异有统计学意义[(1.1±0.4)s，(0.8±0.2)s，(1.6 ±1.2)s](n P<0.05)；进一步两两比较，首发患者眼神性别判断耗时高于健康对照组和高危人群(均n P<0.05)。(3)高危人群眼神阅读准确率与眼神阅读耗时呈负相关(n r＝-0.175，n P＝0.225)，首发患者眼神阅读准确率与眼神阅读耗时呈正相关(n r＝0.503，n P<0.01)，健康对照眼神阅读准确率与眼神阅读耗时不相关(n r＝-0.104，n P＝0.471)。n 结论:情绪识别能力在精神病发作过程中表现出时效降低的特征，高级复杂认知测评需要引入时间维度的测量。“,”Objective:To explore the characteristics of time-consuming and accuracy of emotional recognition in subjects with clinical high risk(CHR) of psychosis, first-episode psychosis patients and healthy controls.Methods:From 2015 to 2017, 50 CHR subjects according to the structured interview for prodromal symptoms (SIPS) interviews, 50 medication-free patients with first episode psychosis by structured clinical interview for DSM-5 (SCID), and 50 healthy controls were enrolled. The reading the mind in the eyes test and cognitive assessment were applied integrated with a computer-based time recording system. The recognition accuracy, time-consuming characteristics and their relationships were analyzed and compared among the three groups.SPSS 17.0 was used for statistical analysis. One-way ANOVA analysis was used to analyze the accuracy and time-consuming characteristics of emotion recognition in the three groups. LSD test was used for pairwise comparison. Pearson correlation analysis was used to analyze the accuracy and time-consuming characteristics of emotion recognition of the three groups.Results:(1)There were significant differences in the accuracy of eye reading in high-risk group ((65.1±10.4)%), healthy control group ((72.5±6.6)%)and first-episode patients ((50.3±21.6)%)(n P<0.05). Further pairwise comparison showed that the accuracy rates of eye reading of high-risk group and first-episode patients were lower than that of healthy control group, while the first-episode patients were lower than high-risk group (alln P<0.05). In the accuracy rate of eye sex judgment, there were significant differences among the three groups ((80.6±26.0)%, (92.7±3.7)%, (91.8±4.4)%) (n P<0.05), and further pairwise comparison, the accuracy rate of first-episode patients was lower than that of healthy control group and high-risk group(alln P<0.05). (2) There were statistically significant differences in eye reading time in high-risk group ((12.4±11.2)s), healthy control group ((6.9±1.7)s) and first-episode group ((10.3±6.0)s)(n P<0.05). Further pairwise comparison showed that the eye reading time of high-risk group was higher than that of healthy control group (n P<0.05). There was significant difference in the three groups in the eye sex judgment time ((1.1±0.4)s, (0.8±0.2)s, (1.6±1.2)s) (n P<0.05), and further pairwise comparison showed that the first-episode patients' eye sex judgment time was higher than that of the healthy control group and high-risk groups (alln P<0.05). (3)There was a negative correlation between eye reading accuracy and eye reading time (n r=-0.175, n P=0.225) in high-risk group. There was a positive correlation between eye reading accuracy and eye reading time in first-episode patients (n r=0.503, n P<0.01). There was no correlation between eye reading accuracy and eye reading time in healthy controls (n r=-0.104, n P=0.471).n Conclusion:Emotional recognition ability is characterized by reduced efficiency in the process of psychiatric attack. Advanced complex cognitive assessment needs to introduce the measurement of time dimension.