帕金森病患者客观和主观执行功能之间的关系。

IF 1.8 4区 心理学 Q3 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Molly Split, Celina Pluim McDowell, Francesca V Lopez, Erin Almklov, J Vincent Filoteo, Stephanie Lessig, Irene Litvan, Dawn M Schiehser
{"title":"帕金森病患者客观和主观执行功能之间的关系。","authors":"Molly Split, Celina Pluim McDowell, Francesca V Lopez, Erin Almklov, J Vincent Filoteo, Stephanie Lessig, Irene Litvan, Dawn M Schiehser","doi":"10.1080/13803395.2024.2340812","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Difficulties in executive functioning (EF) are common in PD; however, the relationship between subjective and objective EF is unclear. Understanding this relationship could help guide clinical EF assessment. This study examined the relationship between subjective self-reported EF (SEF) and objective EF (OEF) and predictors of SEF-OEF discrepancies in PD.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>One-hundred and sixteen non-demented PD participants completed measures of OEF (i.e. problem-solving, cognitive flexibility, inhibition, and working memory) and SEF (Frontal Systems Behavior Scale-Self Executive Dysfunction Subscale). Pearson bivariate correlations and linear regressions were performed to examine the relationship between SEF and OEF and the non-motor symptoms (e.g. mood, fatigue), demographic, and PD characteristic (e.g. MCI status) predictors of discrepancies between OEF and SEF (|OEF minus SEF scores|). Correlates of under-, over-, and accurate-reporting were also explored.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Greater SEF complaints and worse OEF were significantly associated (<i>β</i> =.200, <i>p</i> = .009) and 64% of participants accurately identified their level of OEF abilities. Fewer years of education and greater symptoms of depression, anxiety, and fatigue significantly correlated with greater discrepancies between OEF and SEF. Fatigue was the best predictor of EF discrepancy in the overall sample (β = .281, <i>p</i> = .022). Exploratory analyses revealed apathy and fatigue associated with greater under-reporting, while anxiety associated with greater over-reporting.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>SEF and OEF are significantly related in PD. Approximately 64% of non-demented persons with PD accurately reported their EF skill level, while 28% under-reported and 8% over-reported. SEF-OEF discrepancies were predicted by fatigue in the overall sample. Preliminary evidence suggests reduced apathy and fatigue symptoms relate to more under-reporting, while anxiety relates to greater over-reporting. Given the prevalence of these non-motor symptoms in PD, it is important to carefully consider them when assessing EF in PD.</p>","PeriodicalId":15382,"journal":{"name":"Journal of clinical and experimental neuropsychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The relationship between objective and subjective executive function in Parkinson's disease.\",\"authors\":\"Molly Split, Celina Pluim McDowell, Francesca V Lopez, Erin Almklov, J Vincent Filoteo, Stephanie Lessig, Irene Litvan, Dawn M Schiehser\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/13803395.2024.2340812\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Difficulties in executive functioning (EF) are common in PD; however, the relationship between subjective and objective EF is unclear. Understanding this relationship could help guide clinical EF assessment. This study examined the relationship between subjective self-reported EF (SEF) and objective EF (OEF) and predictors of SEF-OEF discrepancies in PD.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>One-hundred and sixteen non-demented PD participants completed measures of OEF (i.e. problem-solving, cognitive flexibility, inhibition, and working memory) and SEF (Frontal Systems Behavior Scale-Self Executive Dysfunction Subscale). Pearson bivariate correlations and linear regressions were performed to examine the relationship between SEF and OEF and the non-motor symptoms (e.g. mood, fatigue), demographic, and PD characteristic (e.g. MCI status) predictors of discrepancies between OEF and SEF (|OEF minus SEF scores|). Correlates of under-, over-, and accurate-reporting were also explored.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Greater SEF complaints and worse OEF were significantly associated (<i>β</i> =.200, <i>p</i> = .009) and 64% of participants accurately identified their level of OEF abilities. Fewer years of education and greater symptoms of depression, anxiety, and fatigue significantly correlated with greater discrepancies between OEF and SEF. Fatigue was the best predictor of EF discrepancy in the overall sample (β = .281, <i>p</i> = .022). Exploratory analyses revealed apathy and fatigue associated with greater under-reporting, while anxiety associated with greater over-reporting.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>SEF and OEF are significantly related in PD. Approximately 64% of non-demented persons with PD accurately reported their EF skill level, while 28% under-reported and 8% over-reported. SEF-OEF discrepancies were predicted by fatigue in the overall sample. Preliminary evidence suggests reduced apathy and fatigue symptoms relate to more under-reporting, while anxiety relates to greater over-reporting. Given the prevalence of these non-motor symptoms in PD, it is important to carefully consider them when assessing EF in PD.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15382,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of clinical and experimental neuropsychology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of clinical and experimental neuropsychology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/13803395.2024.2340812\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/5/9 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of clinical and experimental neuropsychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13803395.2024.2340812","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/5/9 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

前言执行功能(EF)障碍在帕金森病中很常见,但主观和客观 EF 之间的关系尚不清楚。了解这种关系有助于指导临床执行功能评估。本研究探讨了主观自我报告的EF(SEF)与客观EF(OEF)之间的关系,以及PD患者SEF-OEF差异的预测因素:116名非痴呆症患者完成了OEF(即解决问题、认知灵活性、抑制和工作记忆)和SEF(额叶系统行为量表-自我执行功能障碍分量表)的测量。为了研究 SEF 和 OEF 与非运动症状(如情绪、疲劳)、人口统计学和帕金森病特征(如 MCI 状态)之间的关系,对 OEF 和 SEF 之间的差异(|OEF 分数减 SEF 分数|)的预测因素进行了皮尔逊双变量相关和线性回归。研究还探讨了少报、多报和准确报告的相关性:结果:SEF投诉较多与OEF较差有显著相关性(β=.200,p=.009),64%的参与者能准确识别自己的OEF能力水平。受教育年限越短,抑郁、焦虑和疲劳症状越严重,与 OEF 和 SEF 之间的差异越大明显相关。在整个样本中,疲劳是预测EF差异的最佳指标(β = .281, p = .022)。探索性分析表明,冷漠和疲劳与更大程度的少报有关,而焦虑则与更大程度的多报有关:结论:SEF和OEF在帕金森病中具有显著相关性。约64%的非痴呆症患者准确报告了他们的EF技能水平,28%的患者报告不足,8%的患者报告过多。在整个样本中,SEF-OEF差异是由疲劳所预测的。初步证据表明,冷漠和疲劳症状的减轻与更多的低报有关,而焦虑则与更多的高报有关。鉴于这些非运动症状在帕金森病中的普遍性,在评估帕金森病患者的EF时仔细考虑这些症状非常重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The relationship between objective and subjective executive function in Parkinson's disease.

Introduction: Difficulties in executive functioning (EF) are common in PD; however, the relationship between subjective and objective EF is unclear. Understanding this relationship could help guide clinical EF assessment. This study examined the relationship between subjective self-reported EF (SEF) and objective EF (OEF) and predictors of SEF-OEF discrepancies in PD.

Method: One-hundred and sixteen non-demented PD participants completed measures of OEF (i.e. problem-solving, cognitive flexibility, inhibition, and working memory) and SEF (Frontal Systems Behavior Scale-Self Executive Dysfunction Subscale). Pearson bivariate correlations and linear regressions were performed to examine the relationship between SEF and OEF and the non-motor symptoms (e.g. mood, fatigue), demographic, and PD characteristic (e.g. MCI status) predictors of discrepancies between OEF and SEF (|OEF minus SEF scores|). Correlates of under-, over-, and accurate-reporting were also explored.

Results: Greater SEF complaints and worse OEF were significantly associated (β =.200, p = .009) and 64% of participants accurately identified their level of OEF abilities. Fewer years of education and greater symptoms of depression, anxiety, and fatigue significantly correlated with greater discrepancies between OEF and SEF. Fatigue was the best predictor of EF discrepancy in the overall sample (β = .281, p = .022). Exploratory analyses revealed apathy and fatigue associated with greater under-reporting, while anxiety associated with greater over-reporting.

Conclusions: SEF and OEF are significantly related in PD. Approximately 64% of non-demented persons with PD accurately reported their EF skill level, while 28% under-reported and 8% over-reported. SEF-OEF discrepancies were predicted by fatigue in the overall sample. Preliminary evidence suggests reduced apathy and fatigue symptoms relate to more under-reporting, while anxiety relates to greater over-reporting. Given the prevalence of these non-motor symptoms in PD, it is important to carefully consider them when assessing EF in PD.

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
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
4.50%
发文量
52
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology ( JCEN) publishes research on the neuropsychological consequences of brain disease, disorders, and dysfunction, and aims to promote the integration of theories, methods, and research findings in clinical and experimental neuropsychology. The primary emphasis of JCEN is to publish original empirical research pertaining to brain-behavior relationships and neuropsychological manifestations of brain disease. Theoretical and methodological papers, critical reviews of content areas, and theoretically-relevant case studies are also welcome.
×
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