目的 探索不同认知功能孤独症谱系障碍(autism spectrum disorder, ASD)儿童在心理教育评估量表第3版(PEP-3)中反应特征, 为临床诊断和康复提供可循依据。方法 以智力测试结果为界定标准, 选择低功能ASD(LFA)、高功能ASD(HFA)和正常对照组儿童各26例, 各组性别、年龄相匹配各组男23例、女3例, 年龄在2~5岁间, 平均年龄分别为(40.92±9.60)、(40.07±7.60)、(40.12±9.31)月, 采用香港版PEP-3量表的功能发展量表对其进行测评分析。结果 LFA儿童在PEP-3所有功能领域的原积分和发展年龄均明显落后于对照组(P<0.001), HFA组的认知、大肌肉测验的原积分和发展年龄均低于对照组(P<0.05);LFA组的认知、语言表达、语言理解、模仿测验的原积分和发展年龄均明显低于HFA组(P<0.001), 小肌肉测验的原积分和发展年龄均低于HFA组(P<0.05)。LFA组在合成项沟通和体能的功能商数表现为“低-高”趋势(51.68±14.34 VS 75.08±9.00, P<0.001), HFA组则呈现“均衡”现象(91.40±12.93 VS 87.02±11.66, P=0.205)。结论 不同认知功能ASD儿童PEP-3评价结果反映了不同模式, 可作为辅助诊断和教育干预的参考。
Abstract
Objective To explore the developmental profile of children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) on PEP-3. Methods A total of 52 children with ASD who were divided into two groups according their intelligence level, low-function autism (LFA) and high-functioning autism (HFA), and 26 aged-matched typically children were evaluated by PEP-3 (each group included 23 boys and 3 girls, aged 2~5 years old). Results LFA children exhibited a greater developmental delay in all subtests on PEP-3 as compared with typically children (P<0.001).The scores and developmental ages on the cognitive verbal/preverbal (CVP) and gross motor (GM) subtests were lower in HFA group than TD group (P<0.05).LFA group significantly scored lower than HFA group on CVP, expressive language (EL), receptive language (RL), fine motor (FM) and visual motor imitation (VMI) subtests (P<0.05).For the communication composite and motor composite, children with LFA exhibited "low-high" trend (51.68±14.34 VSs 75.08±9.00, P<0.001), while HFA group presented "balanced" phenomenon (91.40±12.93 VS 87.02±11.66, P=0.205). Conclusion Children with ASD of different intelligence level exhibites differently on PEP-3.
关键词
孤独症谱系障碍 /
PEP-3 /
反应模式
Key words
aautism spectrum disorders /
PEP-3 /
developmental profile
{{custom_sec.title}}
{{custom_sec.title}}
{{custom_sec.content}}
参考文献
[1] 静进.孤独症谱系障碍神经学基础与治疗[J].中国儿童保健杂志, 2010, 18(10):729-731.
[2] 静进.应重视和加强高功能广泛性发育障碍的诊疗工作[J].中国实用儿科杂志, 2009, 24(6):427-429.
[3] Chen KL, Chiang FM, Tseng MH, et al.Responsiveness of the psychoeducational profile-third edition for children with autism spectrum disorders[J].J Autism Dev Disord, 2011, 41(12):1658-1664.
[4] Di Nuovo S, Giovanna A.Families with autistic children[J].Rivista di Studi Familiari, 2012, 26(8):25-37.
[5] American Psychiatric Association.Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders[M].4th ed.Washington DC:APA, 1994:65-78. [6] Schopler E, Lansing MD, Reichler RJ, et al.Examiner's manual of psychoeducational profile[M].3rd ed.2005.
[7] Jeff F.Assessment methods used in texas public schools for the diagnosis of pervasive developmental disorders in children:a survey[J].Texas Journal of Audiology and Speech Pathology, 2010, 26(4):325-338.
[8] Klose LM, Plotts C, Kozeneski N, et al.A review of assessment tools for diagnosis of autism spectrum disorders:implications for school practice[J].Assessment for Effective Intervention, 2011, 20(7):1-8.
[9] Portoghese C, Buttiglione M, Pavone F, et al.The usefulness of the revised psychoeducational profile for the assessment of preschool children with pervasive developmental disorders[J].Autism, 2009, 13(2):179-191.
基金
国家自然科学基金(81172687);教育部博士点基金(20110171110053)
PDF(607 KB)
