论文部分内容阅读
背景:工作记忆障碍是帕金森病患者最常见的认知障碍之一,但检查方法不同常常导致结果不一致。目的:比较不同方法对帕金森病患者工作记忆障碍检查的敏感性。设计:病例对照研究。地点和对象:对本院帕金森病和锥体外系疾病诊疗中心确诊的帕金森病患者(30例)进行研究,排除继发性帕金森病和帕金森综合征。正常对照组(30例)选择同年龄段健康老年人,无头痛,头晕。无神经系统阳性体征。无严重心、肺、肾脏疾病。方法:对确诊的帕金森病患者及正常对照组进行简明精神状态量表(MMSE)评分,Zung量表评分,本顿视觉保持测验及仿Smith工作记忆软件检查。主要观察指标:①本顿视觉保持测验成绩。②空间工作记忆检查正确率。③物体工作记忆检查正确率。结果:帕金森病患者与正常对照组在年龄、受教育年限、智能等方面无显著性差别。本顿视觉保持测验成绩帕金森病组犤(21.00±4.81)分犦与对照组犤(22.96±4.84)分犦比较,差异无显著性意义(t=0.0034,P>0.05)。帕金森病患者空间工作记忆成绩犤(76.95±14.4)%犦较对照组犤(91.00±6.77)%犦显著降低,差异有显著性意义(t=3.806,P<0.01)。帕金森病患者物体工作记忆成绩犤(67.06±7.95)%犦与对照组犤(72.70±8.12)%犦相比差异无显著性意义(t=0.0081,P>0.05)。结论:仿Smith工作记忆软?
Background: Working memory disorders are one of the most common cognitive disorders in Parkinson’s disease patients, but different methods of examination often result in inconsistent results. OBJECTIVE: To compare the sensitivity of different methods in the examination of working memory disorders in Parkinson’s disease patients. Design: Case-control study. Location and Subjects: Parkinson’s disease and extrapyramidal disease diagnosed Parkinson’s disease patients (30 patients) were studied to exclude secondary Parkinson’s disease and Parkinson’s syndrome. Normal control group (30 cases) choose the same age healthy elderly, no headache, dizziness. No nervous system positive signs. No serious heart, lung, kidney disease. Methods: The MMSE score, Zung scale score, Benton visual retention test and imitation Smith working memory software were used to diagnose patients with Parkinson’s disease and normal controls. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: ① Benton Visual Test Test scores. ② spatial working memory check correct rate. ③ object working memory check correct rate. Results: There was no significant difference in age, educational years, intelligence and other aspects between Parkinson’s disease patients and normal controls. Benton visual retention test results Parkinson’s disease group 犤 (21.00 ± 4.81) points compared with the control group 犤 (22.96 ± 4.84) points, the difference was not statistically significant (t = 0.0034, P> 0.05). Parker’s disease patients with spatial working memory 犤 (76.95 ± 14.4)% 犦 than the control group 犤 (91.00 ± 6.77)% 犦 significantly lower, the difference was statistically significant (t = 3.806, P <0.01). There was no significant difference in the working memory scores of patients with Parkinson’s disease (67.06 ± 7.95%) compared with that of the control group (72.70 ± 8.12%) (= 0.0081, P> 0.05). Conclusion: imitation Smith working memory soft?