精神分裂症患者自知力与内在耻感的相关性研究(英文)

背景精神分裂症患者自知力和内在耻感的关系具有理论和实践上的重要性,因为这和患者寻找或接受治疗的意愿密切相关。目的研究中国大陆精神分裂症患者自知力和内在耻感的关系。方法共有65例住院治疗的精神分裂症患者和27例门诊治疗的精神分裂症患者(病程的中位数为4年)完成了两个中文版自评量表-精神疾病内在耻感量表(Internalized Stigma of Mental Illness,ISMI)和修订版病耻感经历问卷(Modified Consumer Experiences of Stigma Questionnaire,MCESQ)的测评。由高年资精神科医生采用阳性症状量表(Scale for Assessment of Positive Symptoms,SAPS)和阴性症状量表(Scale for Assessment of Negative Symptoms,SANS)评定了患者的精神病理症状。由两位高年资精神科医生采用简明精神病学量表中文版的自知力条目评定患者对自身精神疾病的认知,依据分数将患者分为有自知力组和无自知力组。结果有自知力组有49例患者,无自知力组为43例。无自知力患者的病程显著短于有自知力组,更可能为住院治疗者,并且具有更明显的阴性和阳性症状(仅仅表现在趋势上)。有自知力组患者在精神疾病内在耻感量表疏离分量表得分上显著高于无自知力组的患者,但是两个量表的其他分量表得分组间无统计学差异。两个量表48个条目中仅有4个条目得分存在组间差异。Logistic回归没有发现无自知力和两个耻感量表分数或症状量表得分之间存在相关性。结论在中国大陆精神分裂症门诊与住院患者中进行的本研究不支持以前的研究发现:即有自知力的精神分裂症患者会报告更多的耻感经历。本研究使用的耻感量表在中国地区的应用还需要进一步的修订和证实;未来需要对下列问题进行研究:选择不同诊断的患者、对自知力进行更精细的评估以及随时间推移自知力及病耻感经历的波动等等,进一步澄清精神分裂症患者中这两个现象间的复杂关系。

Correlation between insight and internalized stigma in patients with schizophrenia

Background： The relationship between insight and internalized stigma in patients with schizophrenia is important both for theoretical and practical reasons because of its close association with patients’ willingness to seek （or accept） care for their mental illness. Objective： To investigate the relationship between insight and internalized stigma in patients with schizophrenia in mainland China. Methods： 65 inpatients and 27 outpatients with schizophrenia who had a median duration of four years of illness completed Chinese versions of two self-report questionnaires—the Internalized Stigma of Mental Illness （ISMI） scale and the Modified Consumer Experiences of Stigma Questionnaire （MCESQ）. The patients were also assessed by senior psychiatrists using the Scale for Assessment of Positive Symptoms （SAPS） and the Scale for Assessment of Negative Symptoms （SANS）. Patients were divided into those with and without insight into their illness based on the score of the insight item on the Chinese version of the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale. Results： 49 patients were classified as having insight and 43 classified as lacking insight. Compared to patients with insight, those without insight had a significantly shorter duration of illness, were more likely to be inpatients, and （at trend level only） had more prominent positive and negative symptoms. The ‘alienation’ subscale score of the ISMI was significantly higher in patients with insight but none of the remaining six subscales in the two instruments were different between the two groups and only 4 of the 48 separate items in the two scales were significantly different between the groups. Logistic regression analysis found no relationship between lack of insight and the scores of the two self-completion stigma scales or the scores of the two clinician-administered symptom scales. Conclusion： This study among inpatients and outpatients with schizophrenia in China does not support findings of previous studies that report increased experience of stigma among patients who have better insight. The measures of stigma used in the study need further revision and validation for use in China and studies with a wider spectrum of patients that make more detailed assessments of insight and that follow fluctuations in insight and experiences of stigma over time are needed to clarify the complex relationship between these two phenomena in patients with schizophrenia.