Gallant S J, Popiel D A, Hoffman D M, Chakraborty P K, Hamilton J A
Department of Medical Psychology, Uniformed Services of the Health Sciences, Bethesda, Maryland 20814-4799.
Psychosom Med. 1992 Mar-Apr;54(2):167-81. doi: 10.1097/00006842-199203000-00004.
Five degree of change criteria used in previous research to confirm premenstrual syndrome/late luteal phase dysphoric disorder (PMS/LLPDD) based on daily ratings were examined to determine how well each differentiated between women claiming to experience severe symptoms and women with normal menstrual experience. Frequency and nature of stressful events and subjective perceptions of impairment were also examined. Ratings were evaluated in 31 women who met DSM III-R criteria for a provisional diagnosis of LLPDD, and 34 women who reported no premenstrual symptomatology. Ratings for a sample of women taking oral contraceptives and a sample of men were also included for comparison purposes. Results indicated no differences between the groups in the frequency of stressful events. However, the PMS/LLPDD group rated their problems as more disturbing and evidenced a cyclical pattern in the occurrence of negative interpersonal interactions at work that was suggestive of some impaired functioning. None of the five change criteria differentiated the PMS/LLPDD group from the normally cycling No PMS group, and only one differentiated this group from the oral contraceptive No PMS group. This was true whether a liberal or conservative standard of confirmation was applied. The implications of these findings for using daily ratings to confirm PMS/LLPDD are discussed.
对先前研究中基于每日评分来确诊经前综合征/黄体后期烦躁障碍（PMS/LLPDD）所采用的五点变化标准进行了检验，以确定各项标准在区分声称有严重症状的女性和月经体验正常的女性方面的效果如何。还对压力事件的频率和性质以及功能损害的主观感受进行了研究。对31名符合DSM III-R临时诊断标准的LLPDD女性和34名报告无经前症状的女性的评分进行了评估。为作比较，还纳入了口服避孕药女性样本和男性样本的评分。结果表明，两组在压力事件频率上无差异。然而，PMS/LLPDD组将他们的问题评为更令人困扰，并在工作中负面人际互动的发生上呈现出一种周期性模式，这表明存在一定的功能损害。五项变化标准中没有一项能将PMS/LLPDD组与月经周期正常的无PMS组区分开来，只有一项能将该组与口服避孕药无PMS组区分开来。无论采用宽松还是保守的确认标准，情况都是如此。讨论了这些发现对使用每日评分来确诊PMS/LLPDD的意义。
