Edinger J D, Fins A I, Goeke J M, McMillan D K, Gersh T L, Krystal A D, McCall W V
Durham VA Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina, USA.
Sleep. 1996 Jun;19(5):398-411.
Over the past 15 years, there has been considerable debate concerning the extent to which insomnia patients can be classified into diagnostic subtypes. Despite this debate, relatively little research has been conducted to empirically determine whether naturally occurring insomnia subtypes might be identified within populations of sleep clinic patients. In the current study we used a hierarchical cluster analysis to empirically identify subtypes among a mixed group of normal sleepers and the insomnia outpatients who presented to our sleep center over the past decade. Using factor-analytically derived composite variables that summarized data obtained from sleep history questionnaires and polysomnographic monitoring, this clustering procedure resulted in the identification of 14 subgroups that varied between four and 34 patients/subjects in size. Subsequently, subgroup mean scores for the composite variables used in the clustering procedure were used to construct profiles for each of the 14 clusters. A multivariate profile analysis, employed to elucidate subgroup differences, showed that these cluster profiles differed in terms of their configural shapes, average elevations, and degrees of interscale differences. Furthermore, both DSM-III-R (American Psychiatric Association) and International Classification of Sleep Disorders (ICSD) insomnia diagnoses, assigned independent of cluster findings, suggested that these subtypes differed significantly in regard to their diagnostic compositions. Nevertheless, a far-from-perfect concordance was observed between such clinically assigned diagnoses and cluster group membership. In fact, many of the empirically identified groups were composed of various DSM-III-R and/or ICSD diagnostic subtypes. These results provided only partial support for current DSM and ICSD insomnia categories. However, our results support the existence of multiple, clinically discrete insomnia subtypes and provide information that may be useful in future revisions of current insomnia nosologies.
在过去15年里,关于失眠患者可被分类为诊断亚型的程度存在大量争论。尽管有此争论,但相对较少的研究是为了实证确定在睡眠诊所患者群体中是否能识别出自然发生的失眠亚型。在当前研究中,我们使用层次聚类分析来实证识别过去十年间到我们睡眠中心就诊的正常睡眠者和失眠门诊患者混合群体中的亚型。使用从睡眠史问卷和多导睡眠图监测获得的数据经因子分析得出的综合变量,这种聚类程序识别出了14个亚组,每组规模在4至34名患者/受试者之间。随后,用于聚类程序的综合变量的亚组平均得分被用来构建这14个聚类中每一个的概况。采用多变量概况分析来阐明亚组差异,结果显示这些聚类概况在其构型形状、平均高度和量表间差异程度方面有所不同。此外,独立于聚类结果分配的《精神疾病诊断与统计手册》第三版修订本(美国精神病学协会)和《国际睡眠障碍分类》失眠诊断表明,这些亚型在诊断构成方面有显著差异。然而,在这种临床分配的诊断与聚类组成员之间观察到的一致性远非完美。事实上,许多经实证识别的组由各种《精神疾病诊断与统计手册》第三版修订本和/或《国际睡眠障碍分类》诊断亚型组成。这些结果只为当前的《精神疾病诊断与统计手册》和《国际睡眠障碍分类》失眠类别提供了部分支持。然而,我们的结果支持存在多种临床上不同的失眠亚型,并提供了可能对当前失眠分类法未来修订有用的信息。