Suppr超能文献

[抑制在强迫障碍中的作用]

[The role of inhibition in obsessional-compulsive disorders].

作者信息

Dupuy M, Rouillon F, Bungener C

机构信息

LPPS EA 4057, IUPDP, université Paris Descartes, 75014 Paris, France.

出版信息

Encephale. 2013 Feb;39(1):44-50. doi: 10.1016/j.encep.2012.06.016. Epub 2012 Sep 23.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION

The nature of neuropsychological mechanisms underlying the clinical picture of obsessions and compulsions has not been clearly determined. A number of studies has emphasized the role of cognitive deficits, but diversity of methodology and overlapping of clinical sub-groups have not established a specific cognitive functioning of these patients. The studies carried out on executive functions have, however, helped to identify the important role that both inhibition and cognitive flexibility play in obsessive-compulsive (OC) symptoms. Most of them have found that a deficit of inhibition and alteration of cognitive flexibility could explain inflexibility and repetitive thoughts and actions typical of all types of OC disorders. The aim of the paper is to present the published data supporting the hypothesis of a specific role played by a deficit of inhibition and cognitive inflexibility. In the first, theoretical part, we present the neuropsychological approach emphasizing inhibition and lack of flexibility as a promising explanation of the functioning of OC disorders. In the second part, we will present studies using various measurements of inhibition and the results of which, therefore, support this hypothesis.

ARGUMENTS AND DISCUSSION

On the theoretical level, it is the model of attention that was used in explaining the OCD hypothesis. In the model of attention control of action, described by Norman, Shallice and Burgess, three systems were emphasized: one that takes care of routine actions, and the second that takes over the first in situations where automatic activities must stop in order to establish an attention control and therefore inhibit automatic responses. When selection of everyday and automatic activities is not sufficient to accomplish a task, it is the third system, that of cognitive control, which takes over. This supervisory attentional system operates in non-routine and ambiguous activities. The cognitive control is charged with detecting potential or emitted cognitive errors and resolving ambiguous situations. Neurocognitive studies show that cingular anterior cortex and prefrontal lateral cortex are engaged in ambiguous and conflicting situations. These two regions are considered essential for inhibition of routine actions, adjustment to change and, more generally, for an efficient and flexible behaviour. Repetitive nature of verification rituals in OCD could be explained in terms of lack of relationship between two systems, leaving in action the one that regulates automatic activities. Therefore, the rituals are considered to be under particular influence of the system which, being in charge of automatic actions, has a deficit in disengagement. Another model of attention, described by Posner, gives a further explanation of OCD. Mental inhibition has the capacity to treat information, either by applying strategies to control it (i.e. trying not to remember an unpleasant event) or leaving it to automatic control (i.e. incapacity to experience an emotion in relation to a particular event). In this way, the effort to suppress an intrusive thought is considered as controlled and deliberate cognitive treatment of emotionally charged information. In OCD, in the context of heightened anxiety, the assumed negative valence of information would influence habitual suppression of thought during controlled treatment. As a result, controlled efforts to suppress obsessions in emotionally stressful situations, would lead to the production of repetitive thoughts, as controlled treatment of information has failed in this action. On a clinical and experimental level, these studies have led to a better understanding and conceptualization of OCD. In spite of some conflicting results, there are concordant data in favour of hypotheses of the role of sub-cortical and frontal regions and their function in inhibition/desinhibition implied in the onset and maintenance of OCD. Functional neuroimagery anomalies are also in favour of the role of sub-cortical-frontal region in clinical manifestations of OCD. They are often associated with low performance in cognitive tasks, especially those implying frontal functions, which are, in turn, dependent on a necessary level of attention in order to guide or inhibit motor and cognitive programs.

摘要

引言

强迫症临床表现背后的神经心理学机制本质尚未明确确定。许多研究强调了认知缺陷的作用,但方法的多样性和临床亚组的重叠并未确立这些患者特定的认知功能。然而,关于执行功能的研究有助于确定抑制和认知灵活性在强迫症(OC)症状中所起的重要作用。大多数研究发现,抑制缺陷和认知灵活性改变可以解释所有类型强迫症典型的僵化和重复思维及行为。本文的目的是呈现已发表的数据,支持抑制缺陷和认知僵化起特定作用这一假设。在第一部分理论内容中,我们介绍神经心理学方法,强调抑制和缺乏灵活性是对强迫症功能的一种有前景的解释。在第二部分,我们将展示使用各种抑制测量方法的研究及其结果,这些结果支持这一假设。

论据与讨论

在理论层面,用于解释强迫症假设的是注意力模型。在诺曼、沙利思和伯吉斯描述的行动注意力控制模型中,强调了三个系统:一个负责日常行动,另一个在自动活动必须停止以建立注意力控制从而抑制自动反应的情况下接管第一个系统。当日常和自动活动的选择不足以完成任务时,第三个系统即认知控制系统接管。这个监督性注意力系统在非日常和模糊活动中起作用。认知控制负责检测潜在的或已出现的认知错误并解决模糊情况。神经认知研究表明,前扣带回皮质和前额叶外侧皮质参与模糊和冲突情况。这两个区域被认为对抑制日常行动、适应变化以及更普遍地对有效和灵活行为至关重要。强迫症中核查仪式的重复性质可以用两个系统之间缺乏关联来解释,使得负责自动活动的系统持续运作。因此,这些仪式被认为受到负责自动行动且在脱离方面存在缺陷的系统的特别影响。波斯纳描述的另一个注意力模型对强迫症给出了进一步解释。心理抑制有能力处理信息,要么通过应用策略控制它(即试图不记住不愉快事件),要么将其留给自动控制(即无法体验与特定事件相关的情绪)。这样,抑制侵入性思维的努力被视为对有情感负荷信息的控制性和刻意性认知处理。在强迫症中,在焦虑加剧的背景下,信息假定的负价会影响控制性处理期间对思维的习惯性抑制。结果,在情绪紧张情况下抑制强迫观念的控制性努力会导致重复思维的产生,因为对信息的控制性处理在这一行动中失败了。在临床和实验层面,这些研究使人们对强迫症有了更好的理解和概念化。尽管有一些相互矛盾的结果,但有一致的数据支持关于皮质下和额叶区域的作用及其在强迫症的发病和维持中所涉及的抑制/去抑制功能的假设。功能性神经影像异常也支持皮质下 - 额叶区域在强迫症临床表现中的作用。它们通常与认知任务表现不佳相关,尤其是那些涉及额叶功能的任务,而额叶功能又反过来依赖于引导或抑制运动和认知程序所需的一定水平的注意力。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验