帕金森病的冷漠:照顾者报告与自我评价的差异

Q2 Medicine Functional neurology Pub Date : 2018-01-01 DOI:10.11138/fneur/2018.33.1.031
V Valentino, Alessandro Iavarone, M Amboni, F Moschiano, M Picillo, V Petretta, G Cicarelli
{"title":"帕金森病的冷漠:照顾者报告与自我评价的差异","authors":"V Valentino,&nbsp;Alessandro Iavarone,&nbsp;M Amboni,&nbsp;F Moschiano,&nbsp;M Picillo,&nbsp;V Petretta,&nbsp;G Cicarelli","doi":"10.11138/fneur/2018.33.1.031","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Apathy is a state of diminished goal-directed speech, motor activity and emotions. The prevalence of apathy in Parkinson's disease (PD) ranges from 16 to 62%. Several studies have investigated the relationships between apathy and other dimensions of PD, but little is known about possible discrepancies between self-evaluation (SE) and caregiver reporting (CR) of this symptom. The aim of this study is twofold: 1) to investigate the differences in apathy evaluations according to the point of view from which apathy is reported (SE vs CR); 2) to identify the possible relationships between each of the two evaluations (SE and CR) and cognitive and affective dimensions of PD. Forty-eight patients with PD were assessed using the Apathy Evaluation Scale (AES) in its SE and CR versions (AES-SE and AES-CR); cognitive, affective and behavioral symptoms were also assessed. AES-SE scores were significantly higher than AESCR ones. Neither AES version correlated with depression, whereas both correlated with motor impairment, disease stage and behavioral symptoms. Mini-Mental State Examination and Frontal Assessment Battery scores showed significant negative correlations only with AES-SE scores. Our findings suggest that the point of view from which apathy is seen can lead to significant discrepancies, even when using the same tool. This should be taken into account in order to obtain correct assessment of this disabling and distressing symptom.</p>","PeriodicalId":12560,"journal":{"name":"Functional neurology","volume":"33 1","pages":"31-35"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.11138/fneur/2018.33.1.031","citationCount":"12","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Apathy in Parkinson's disease: differences between caregiver's report and self-evaluation.\",\"authors\":\"V Valentino,&nbsp;Alessandro Iavarone,&nbsp;M Amboni,&nbsp;F Moschiano,&nbsp;M Picillo,&nbsp;V Petretta,&nbsp;G Cicarelli\",\"doi\":\"10.11138/fneur/2018.33.1.031\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Apathy is a state of diminished goal-directed speech, motor activity and emotions. The prevalence of apathy in Parkinson's disease (PD) ranges from 16 to 62%. Several studies have investigated the relationships between apathy and other dimensions of PD, but little is known about possible discrepancies between self-evaluation (SE) and caregiver reporting (CR) of this symptom. The aim of this study is twofold: 1) to investigate the differences in apathy evaluations according to the point of view from which apathy is reported (SE vs CR); 2) to identify the possible relationships between each of the two evaluations (SE and CR) and cognitive and affective dimensions of PD. Forty-eight patients with PD were assessed using the Apathy Evaluation Scale (AES) in its SE and CR versions (AES-SE and AES-CR); cognitive, affective and behavioral symptoms were also assessed. AES-SE scores were significantly higher than AESCR ones. Neither AES version correlated with depression, whereas both correlated with motor impairment, disease stage and behavioral symptoms. Mini-Mental State Examination and Frontal Assessment Battery scores showed significant negative correlations only with AES-SE scores. Our findings suggest that the point of view from which apathy is seen can lead to significant discrepancies, even when using the same tool. This should be taken into account in order to obtain correct assessment of this disabling and distressing symptom.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12560,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Functional neurology\",\"volume\":\"33 1\",\"pages\":\"31-35\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.11138/fneur/2018.33.1.031\",\"citationCount\":\"12\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Functional neurology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.11138/fneur/2018.33.1.031\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Functional neurology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.11138/fneur/2018.33.1.031","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 12

摘要

冷漠是一种目标导向的言语、运动活动和情绪减少的状态。帕金森氏病(PD)中冷漠的患病率从16%到62%不等。一些研究已经调查了冷漠与PD其他维度之间的关系,但很少有人知道自我评价(SE)和照顾者报告(CR)之间可能存在差异。本研究的目的是双重的:1)根据冷漠报告的观点来调查冷漠评价的差异(SE vs CR);2)确定两种评价(SE和CR)与PD的认知和情感维度之间可能存在的关系。采用冷漠评价量表(AES)的SE和CR版本(AES-SE和AES-CR)对48例PD患者进行评估;还评估了认知、情感和行为症状。AES-SE评分显著高于AESCR评分。AES版本与抑郁均不相关,而两者均与运动障碍、疾病分期和行为症状相关。迷你精神状态检查和正面评估电池得分仅与AES-SE得分呈显著负相关。我们的研究结果表明,即使使用相同的工具,观察冷漠的角度也会导致显著的差异。为了获得对这种致残和痛苦症状的正确评估,应该考虑到这一点。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Apathy in Parkinson's disease: differences between caregiver's report and self-evaluation.

Apathy is a state of diminished goal-directed speech, motor activity and emotions. The prevalence of apathy in Parkinson's disease (PD) ranges from 16 to 62%. Several studies have investigated the relationships between apathy and other dimensions of PD, but little is known about possible discrepancies between self-evaluation (SE) and caregiver reporting (CR) of this symptom. The aim of this study is twofold: 1) to investigate the differences in apathy evaluations according to the point of view from which apathy is reported (SE vs CR); 2) to identify the possible relationships between each of the two evaluations (SE and CR) and cognitive and affective dimensions of PD. Forty-eight patients with PD were assessed using the Apathy Evaluation Scale (AES) in its SE and CR versions (AES-SE and AES-CR); cognitive, affective and behavioral symptoms were also assessed. AES-SE scores were significantly higher than AESCR ones. Neither AES version correlated with depression, whereas both correlated with motor impairment, disease stage and behavioral symptoms. Mini-Mental State Examination and Frontal Assessment Battery scores showed significant negative correlations only with AES-SE scores. Our findings suggest that the point of view from which apathy is seen can lead to significant discrepancies, even when using the same tool. This should be taken into account in order to obtain correct assessment of this disabling and distressing symptom.

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
Functional neurology
Functional neurology 医学-神经科学
CiteScore
3.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Information not localized
期刊最新文献
Psychometric properties of the Italian version of the Barthel Index in patients with Parkinson's disease: a reliability and validity study. Effects of Constraint-Induced Movement Therapy on upper limb activity according to a bi-dimensional kinematic analysis in progressive multiple sclerosis patients: a randomized single-blind pilot study. Does a single bout of exercise impacts BDNF, oxidative stress and epigenetic markers in spinal cord injury patients? Acute ischemic stroke management in Lebanon: obstacles and solutions. Neurophysiological changes after cognitive-motor tasks in Parkinson's disease patients with deep brain stimulation.
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1