Suppr超能文献

重复测试和点测试在原发性进行性失语症患者亚型分型中的效用。

Utility of the Repeat and Point Test for Subtyping Patients With Primary Progressive Aphasia.

机构信息

Neurologische Klinik und Poliklinik.

Acibadem Mehmet Ali Aydinlar University School of Medicine, Department of Neurology, İstanbul, Turkey.

出版信息

Alzheimer Dis Assoc Disord. 2022;36(1):44-51. doi: 10.1097/WAD.0000000000000482.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Primary progressive aphasia (PPA) may present with three distinct clinical sybtypes: semantic variant PPA (svPPA), nonfluent/agrammatic variant PPA (nfvPPA), and logopenic variant PPA (lvPPA).

OBJECTIVE

The aim was to examine the utility of the German version of the Repeat and Point (R&P) Test for subtyping patients with PPA.

METHOD

During the R&P Test, the examiner reads out aloud a noun and the participants are asked to repeat the word and subsequently point to the corresponding picture. Data from 204 patients (68 svPPA, 85 nfvPPA, and 51 lvPPA) and 33 healthy controls were analyzed.

RESULTS

Controls completed both tasks with >90% accuracy. Patients with svPPA had high scores in repetition (mean=9.2±1.32) but low scores in pointing (mean=6±2.52). In contrast, patients with nfvPPA and lvPPA performed comparably in both tasks with lower scores in repetition (mean=7.4±2.7 for nfvPPA and 8.2±2.34 for lvPPA) but higher scores in pointing (mean=8.9±1.41 for nfvPPA and 8.6±1.62 for lvPPA). The R&P Test had high accuracy discriminating svPPA from nfvPPA (83% accuracy) and lvPPA (79% accuracy). However, there was low accuracy discriminating nfvPPA from lvPPA (<60%).

CONCLUSION

The R&P Test helps to differentiate svPPA from 2 nonsemantic variants (nfvPPA and lvPPA). However, additional tests are required for the differentiation of nfvPPA and lvPPA.

摘要

背景

原发性进行性失语症(PPA)可能表现为三种不同的临床亚型:语义变异型 PPA(svPPA)、非流利/语法障碍变异型 PPA(nfvPPA)和失读型 PPA(lvPPA)。

目的

本研究旨在检验德国版重复和指认(R&P)测验在 PPA 患者亚型分型中的效用。

方法

在 R&P 测试中,检查者大声朗读一个名词,参与者被要求重复该单词,然后指向相应的图片。对 204 名患者(68 名 svPPA、85 名 nfvPPA 和 51 名 lvPPA)和 33 名健康对照者的数据进行了分析。

结果

对照组在两项任务中的准确率均>90%。svPPA 患者在重复任务中的得分较高(均值=9.2±1.32),但在指认任务中的得分较低(均值=6±2.52)。相比之下,nfvPPA 和 lvPPA 患者在两项任务中的表现相当,重复任务的得分较低(nfvPPA 均值=7.4±2.7,lvPPA 均值=8.2±2.34),指认任务的得分较高(nfvPPA 均值=8.9±1.41,lvPPA 均值=8.6±1.62)。R&P 测试在区分 svPPA 与 nfvPPA(83%的准确率)和 lvPPA(79%的准确率)方面具有较高的准确性。然而,在区分 nfvPPA 和 lvPPA 方面,准确性较低(<60%)。

结论

R&P 测试有助于区分 svPPA 与 2 种非语义变异型(nfvPPA 和 lvPPA)。然而,还需要其他测试来区分 nfvPPA 和 lvPPA。

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