社会认知将行为变异型额颞叶痴呆表型综合征与行为变异型额颞叶痴呆区分开来

IF 1.7 4区 医学 Q3 GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY
Marie‐Paule E. van Engelen, Paulette Louwers, Jay L. P. Fieldhouse, Flora T. Gossink, Sterre C. M. de Boer, Annemieke Dols, Philip Scheltens, Sigfried N. T. M. Schouws, Yolande A. L. Pijnenburg, Everard G. B. Vijverberg, Welmoed A. Krudop
{"title":"社会认知将行为变异型额颞叶痴呆表型综合征与行为变异型额颞叶痴呆区分开来","authors":"Marie‐Paule E. van Engelen, Paulette Louwers, Jay L. P. Fieldhouse, Flora T. Gossink, Sterre C. M. de Boer, Annemieke Dols, Philip Scheltens, Sigfried N. T. M. Schouws, Yolande A. L. Pijnenburg, Everard G. B. Vijverberg, Welmoed A. Krudop","doi":"10.1111/psyg.13107","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"BackgroundPatients displaying clinical features of behavioural variant of frontotemporal dementia (bvFTD) but lacking both neuroimaging abnormalities and clinical progression are considered to represent the phenocopy syndrome of bvFTD (phFTD). Extensive clinical overlap between early phase bvFTD and phFTD hampers diagnostic distinction. We aimed to assess the diagnostic value of clinician‐rated, self‐reported and caregiver‐reported symptoms for clinical distinction between phFTD and bvFTD.MethodsThere were 33 phFTD and 95 probable bvFTD patients included in the study (total <jats:italic>N</jats:italic> = 128). Clinician‐rated, self‐reported tests and caregiver‐reported symptoms were compared between phFTD and bvFTD on social cognition, behaviour, mood and activities of daily living (ADL). Scores were compared between groups, followed by multiple logistic regression analysis, adjusted for age and sex. Receiver operating characteristic curves were plotted to assess diagnostic value.ResultsUsing clinician‐rated and self‐reported tests, phFTD patients performed better on facial emotion recognition and reported more depressive symptoms. Caregiver‐reported behavioural symptoms indicated higher behavioural and ADL impairment in phFTD compared to bvFTD. Facial emotion recognition provided highest diagnostic accuracy for distinction of phFTD from bvFTD (area under the curve (AUC) 0.813 95% CI 0.735–0.892, <jats:italic>P</jats:italic> &lt; 0.001, sensitivity 81%, specificity 74%) followed by depressive symptoms (AUC 0.769 95% 0.674–0.864, <jats:italic>P</jats:italic> &lt; 0.001 sensitivity 81%, specificity of 63%).ConclusionSocial cognition tests are most suitable for distinction of phFTD from bvFTD. Caregiver‐reported questionnaires and phFTD diagnosis seemed inversely correlated, showing more symptoms in phFTD. Further research is needed on phFTD aetiology and in caregivers taking into account disease burden to assess what explains this discrepancy between clinician‐rated and caregiver‐based tools.","PeriodicalId":20784,"journal":{"name":"Psychogeriatrics","volume":"22 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Social cognition differentiates phenocopy syndrome of behavioural variant frontotemporal dementia from behavioural variant frontotemporal dementia\",\"authors\":\"Marie‐Paule E. van Engelen, Paulette Louwers, Jay L. P. Fieldhouse, Flora T. Gossink, Sterre C. M. de Boer, Annemieke Dols, Philip Scheltens, Sigfried N. T. M. Schouws, Yolande A. L. Pijnenburg, Everard G. B. Vijverberg, Welmoed A. Krudop\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/psyg.13107\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"BackgroundPatients displaying clinical features of behavioural variant of frontotemporal dementia (bvFTD) but lacking both neuroimaging abnormalities and clinical progression are considered to represent the phenocopy syndrome of bvFTD (phFTD). Extensive clinical overlap between early phase bvFTD and phFTD hampers diagnostic distinction. We aimed to assess the diagnostic value of clinician‐rated, self‐reported and caregiver‐reported symptoms for clinical distinction between phFTD and bvFTD.MethodsThere were 33 phFTD and 95 probable bvFTD patients included in the study (total <jats:italic>N</jats:italic> = 128). Clinician‐rated, self‐reported tests and caregiver‐reported symptoms were compared between phFTD and bvFTD on social cognition, behaviour, mood and activities of daily living (ADL). Scores were compared between groups, followed by multiple logistic regression analysis, adjusted for age and sex. Receiver operating characteristic curves were plotted to assess diagnostic value.ResultsUsing clinician‐rated and self‐reported tests, phFTD patients performed better on facial emotion recognition and reported more depressive symptoms. Caregiver‐reported behavioural symptoms indicated higher behavioural and ADL impairment in phFTD compared to bvFTD. Facial emotion recognition provided highest diagnostic accuracy for distinction of phFTD from bvFTD (area under the curve (AUC) 0.813 95% CI 0.735–0.892, <jats:italic>P</jats:italic> &lt; 0.001, sensitivity 81%, specificity 74%) followed by depressive symptoms (AUC 0.769 95% 0.674–0.864, <jats:italic>P</jats:italic> &lt; 0.001 sensitivity 81%, specificity of 63%).ConclusionSocial cognition tests are most suitable for distinction of phFTD from bvFTD. Caregiver‐reported questionnaires and phFTD diagnosis seemed inversely correlated, showing more symptoms in phFTD. Further research is needed on phFTD aetiology and in caregivers taking into account disease burden to assess what explains this discrepancy between clinician‐rated and caregiver‐based tools.\",\"PeriodicalId\":20784,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Psychogeriatrics\",\"volume\":\"22 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Psychogeriatrics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/psyg.13107\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychogeriatrics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/psyg.13107","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景具有额颞叶痴呆(bvFTD)行为变异临床特征但缺乏神经影像学异常和临床进展的患者被认为是额颞叶痴呆表型综合征(phFTD)的代表。早期 bvFTD 和 phFTD 在临床上的广泛重叠阻碍了诊断上的区分。我们旨在评估临床医生评定、自我报告和护理人员报告的症状对临床区分 phFTD 和 bvFTD 的诊断价值。比较了 phFTD 和 bvFTD 在社会认知、行为、情绪和日常生活活动(ADL)方面的临床医生评分、自我报告测试和护理人员报告症状。对不同组间的得分进行比较,然后进行多元逻辑回归分析,并对年龄和性别进行调整。结果通过临床医生评分和自我报告的测试,phFTD 患者的面部情绪识别能力更强,并报告了更多的抑郁症状。护理人员报告的行为症状表明,与bvFTD相比,phFTD患者的行为和ADL障碍程度更高。面部情绪识别为区分 phFTD 和 bvFTD 提供了最高的诊断准确性(曲线下面积 (AUC) 0.813 95% CI 0.735-0.892,P <0.001,敏感性 81%,特异性 74%),其次是抑郁症状(AUC 0.769 95% 0.674-0.864,P <0.001,敏感性 81%,特异性 63%)。护理人员报告的问卷与phFTD的诊断似乎成反比,显示phFTD的症状更多。需要进一步研究phFTD的病因,并在考虑到疾病负担的情况下对护理者进行研究,以评估临床医生评分和护理者工具之间存在差异的原因。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Social cognition differentiates phenocopy syndrome of behavioural variant frontotemporal dementia from behavioural variant frontotemporal dementia
BackgroundPatients displaying clinical features of behavioural variant of frontotemporal dementia (bvFTD) but lacking both neuroimaging abnormalities and clinical progression are considered to represent the phenocopy syndrome of bvFTD (phFTD). Extensive clinical overlap between early phase bvFTD and phFTD hampers diagnostic distinction. We aimed to assess the diagnostic value of clinician‐rated, self‐reported and caregiver‐reported symptoms for clinical distinction between phFTD and bvFTD.MethodsThere were 33 phFTD and 95 probable bvFTD patients included in the study (total N = 128). Clinician‐rated, self‐reported tests and caregiver‐reported symptoms were compared between phFTD and bvFTD on social cognition, behaviour, mood and activities of daily living (ADL). Scores were compared between groups, followed by multiple logistic regression analysis, adjusted for age and sex. Receiver operating characteristic curves were plotted to assess diagnostic value.ResultsUsing clinician‐rated and self‐reported tests, phFTD patients performed better on facial emotion recognition and reported more depressive symptoms. Caregiver‐reported behavioural symptoms indicated higher behavioural and ADL impairment in phFTD compared to bvFTD. Facial emotion recognition provided highest diagnostic accuracy for distinction of phFTD from bvFTD (area under the curve (AUC) 0.813 95% CI 0.735–0.892, P < 0.001, sensitivity 81%, specificity 74%) followed by depressive symptoms (AUC 0.769 95% 0.674–0.864, P < 0.001 sensitivity 81%, specificity of 63%).ConclusionSocial cognition tests are most suitable for distinction of phFTD from bvFTD. Caregiver‐reported questionnaires and phFTD diagnosis seemed inversely correlated, showing more symptoms in phFTD. Further research is needed on phFTD aetiology and in caregivers taking into account disease burden to assess what explains this discrepancy between clinician‐rated and caregiver‐based tools.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Psychogeriatrics
Psychogeriatrics Medicine-Geriatrics and Gerontology
CiteScore
3.60
自引率
5.00%
发文量
115
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Psychogeriatrics is an international journal sponsored by the Japanese Psychogeriatric Society and publishes peer-reviewed original papers dealing with all aspects of psychogeriatrics and related fields The Journal encourages articles with gerontopsychiatric, neurobiological, genetic, diagnostic, social-psychiatric, health-political, psychological or psychotherapeutic content. Themes can be illuminated through basic science, clinical (human and animal) studies, case studies, epidemiological or humanistic research
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信