Mörtberg Ewa, Tillfors Maria, van Zalk Nejra, Kerr Margaret
Department of Psychology, Stockholm University, Stockholm, Sweden; Department of Clinical Neuroscience/Centre for Psychiatry Research, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Scand J Psychol. 2014 Aug;55(4):350-6. doi: 10.1111/sjop.12117. Epub 2014 Apr 10.
An atypical subgroup of Social Anxiety Disorder (SAD) with impulsive rather than inhibited traits has recently been reported. The current study examined whether such an atypical subgroup could be identified in a clinical population of 84 adults with SAD. The temperament dimensions harm avoidance and novelty seeking of the Temperament and Character Inventory, and the Liebowitz Social Anxiety Scale were used in cluster analyses. The identified clusters were compared on depressive symptoms, the character dimension self-directedness, and treatment outcome. Among the six identified clusters, 24% of the sample had atypical characteristics, demonstrating mainly generalized SAD in combination with coexisting traits of inhibition and impulsivity. As additional signs of severity, this group showed low self-directedness and high levels of depressive symptoms. We also identified a typically inhibited subgroup comprising generalized SAD with high levels of harm avoidance and low levels of novelty seeking, with a similar clinical severity as the atypical subgroup. Thus, higher levels of harm avoidance and social anxiety in combination with higher or lower levels of novelty seeking and low self-directedness seem to contribute to a more severe clinical picture. Post hoc examination of the treatment outcome in these subgroups showed that only 20 to 30% achieved clinically significant change.
最近有报告称,社交焦虑障碍(SAD)存在一个具有冲动而非抑制特质的非典型亚组。本研究调查了在84名患有SAD的成年临床患者群体中是否能识别出这样一个非典型亚组。在聚类分析中使用了气质与性格量表中的回避伤害和寻求新奇的气质维度,以及利博维茨社交焦虑量表。对所识别出的聚类在抑郁症状、性格维度自我导向以及治疗结果方面进行了比较。在所识别出的六个聚类中,24%的样本具有非典型特征,主要表现为广泛性社交焦虑障碍并伴有抑制和冲动的共存特质。作为严重程度的额外迹象,该组表现出低自我导向和高水平的抑郁症状。我们还识别出了一个典型的抑制性亚组,其由具有高回避伤害水平和低寻求新奇水平的广泛性社交焦虑障碍组成,临床严重程度与非典型亚组相似。因此,较高的回避伤害和社交焦虑水平,再加上较高或较低的寻求新奇水平以及低自我导向,似乎会导致更严重的临床症状。对这些亚组治疗结果的事后检验表明,只有20%至30%的患者实现了具有临床意义的改变。