Suppr超能文献

双相 I 型和 II 型障碍的行为激活系统 (BAS) 差异。

Behavioral Activation System (BAS) differences in bipolar I and II disorder.

机构信息

School of Psychiatry, University of New South Wales, NSW, Australia.

出版信息

J Affect Disord. 2013 Oct;151(1):121-8. doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2013.05.061. Epub 2013 Jun 28.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

A growing body of evidence supports the Behavioral Activation System (BAS) dyresgulation model of bipolar disorder, however its application to bipolar II disorder is limited. The current study examines its potential relevance to bipolar I and II disorders. We specifically sought to determine whether bipolar sub-types would differ in terms of BAS sensitivity, and examined for differential prospective relationships between BAS sensitivity and bipolar I and II symptom expression.

METHOD

Participants were recruited from the Sydney-based Black Dog Institute. Diagnostic groups were derived on the basis of agreement between clinician and DSM-IV diagnoses from structured interviews. Baseline measures of BAS sensitivity, mood symptoms and anxiety were completed. Self-rated mood was assessed over a 6-month period. Clinician-rated mood status was re-assessed at follow-up to determine the predictive utility of BAS scores.

RESULTS

The sample comprised 151 bipolar participants (69 bipolar I, 82 bipolar II). BAS-Drive and Reward Responsiveness scores were significantly higher in bipolar I disorder participants. BAS sub-scale scores were uniquely positively associated with mood variability in bipolar I and II disorder. BAS-Drive and Reward Responsiveness scores were positively associated with bipolar I hypo(mania), and with the former also positively associated with bipolar II depression. BAS scores did not predict bipolar I or II mood episode status at 6-month follow-up.

LIMITATIONS

BAS sensitivity was self-reported; inability to establish independence of BAS scores from residual symptoms; lack of controlling for medication effects; inability to determine the influence of life events; length of follow-up period may have not been sufficient to evaluate the predictive utility of BAS sensitivity for mood episodes or detect course of illness differences across bipolar sub-types.

CONCLUSIONS

Differences in BAS sensitivity and associations with mood variability were quantified in bipolar I and II disorder, suggesting the need for tailored treatments for these separate conditions. Further investigation of the role of the BAS in bipolar sub-types is warranted.

摘要

背景

越来越多的证据支持双相情感障碍的行为激活系统(BAS)失调模型,但该模型在双相情感障碍 II 型中的应用有限。本研究探讨了其与双相情感障碍 I 型和 II 型的潜在相关性。我们特别试图确定双相亚型在 BAS 敏感性方面是否存在差异,并研究 BAS 敏感性与双相情感障碍 I 型和 II 型症状表达之间的差异前瞻性关系。

方法

参与者从位于悉尼的黑狗研究所招募。根据结构化访谈中临床医生和 DSM-IV 诊断的一致性,确定诊断组。完成 BAS 敏感性、情绪症状和焦虑的基线测量。在 6 个月的时间内自我评估情绪。在随访时重新评估临床医生评估的情绪状态,以确定 BAS 评分的预测效用。

结果

该样本包括 151 名双相障碍参与者(69 名双相情感障碍 I 型,82 名双相情感障碍 II 型)。BAS-Drive 和奖励反应性评分在双相 I 型障碍患者中显著更高。BAS 子量表评分与双相 I 型和 II 型障碍的情绪波动性呈独特的正相关。BAS-Drive 和奖励反应性评分与双相 I 型低(躁狂)呈正相关,与前者也与双相 II 型抑郁呈正相关。BAS 评分不能预测双相 I 型或 II 型情绪发作状态在 6 个月随访时。

局限性

BAS 敏感性是自我报告的;无法确定 BAS 评分与残留症状的独立性;缺乏对药物作用的控制;无法确定生活事件的影响;随访时间可能不足以评估 BAS 敏感性对情绪发作的预测效用或检测双相亚型的疾病过程差异。

结论

在双相情感障碍 I 型和 II 型中量化了 BAS 敏感性和与情绪波动性的关联,表明需要为这些不同的情况制定针对性的治疗方法。需要进一步研究 BAS 在双相亚型中的作用。

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