Barkley R A, Grodzinsky G, DuPaul G J
Department of Psychology, University of Massachusetts Medical Center, Worcester 01655.
J Abnorm Child Psychol. 1992 Apr;20(2):163-88. doi: 10.1007/BF00916547.
We review 22 neuropsychological studies of frontal lobe functions in children with attention deficit disorder with and without hyperactivity (ADD/+H, ADD/-H). Some measures presumed to assess frontal lobe dysfunctions were not reliably sensitive to the deficits occurring in either form of ADD. Tests of response inhibition more reliably distinguished ADD/+H from normal children. Where impairments were found on other tests between ADD and normal subjects, they were highly inconsistent across studies and seemed strongly related to age of the subjects and possibly to the version of the test employed. Other methodological differences across studies further contributed to the discrepant (LD) and conduct problems, with ADD may be an additional confounding factor in some, though not all, of these studies. In a separate reports. The co-morbidity of other disorders, such as learning disabilities (LD) and conduct problems, with ADD may be an additional confounding factor in some, though not all, of these studies. In a separate study, children with ADD/+H (n = 12) were then compared on frontal lobe tests to three other groups: ADD/-H (n = 12), LD but no ADD (n = 11), and normal children (n = 12) statistically covarying for differences in conduct problems across groups. Most measures did not distinguish among these groups. Both ADD groups made more omission errors on a Continuous Performance Test (CPT) than the normal group. All three clinical groups performed more poorly on the word and interference portions of the Stroop Test. Thus, while both types of ADD share some apparent similarities in deficits on a few frontal lobe tests in this study, the totality of existing findings suggests an additional problem with perceptual-motor speed and processing in the ADD/-H group.
我们回顾了22项关于患有和未患有多动症状的注意力缺陷障碍儿童(ADD/+H,ADD/-H)额叶功能的神经心理学研究。一些被认为可评估额叶功能障碍的测量方法,对两种形式的ADD所出现的缺陷均无可靠的敏感性。反应抑制测试能更可靠地区分ADD/+H儿童与正常儿童。在ADD组和正常受试者之间的其他测试中发现的损伤,在各研究中高度不一致,且似乎与受试者年龄以及可能与所采用的测试版本密切相关。各研究中的其他方法学差异进一步导致了结果的不一致。其他疾病的共病情况,如学习障碍(LD)和行为问题,在某些(尽管不是全部)此类研究中,ADD可能是一个额外的混杂因素。在另一项研究中,将患有ADD/+H的儿童(n = 12)在额叶测试中与其他三组进行比较:ADD/-H组(n = 12)、患有LD但无ADD的儿童(n = 11)以及正常儿童(n = 12),对各组间行为问题的差异进行统计学协变量分析。大多数测量方法无法区分这些组。两个ADD组在连续性能测试(CPT)中比正常组出现更多遗漏错误。所有三个临床组在斯特鲁普测试的文字和干扰部分表现更差。因此,虽然在本研究中两种类型的ADD在一些额叶测试的缺陷上有一些明显相似之处,但现有研究结果总体表明,ADD/-H组在感知运动速度和处理方面存在额外问题。