多民族大一新生青少年人格障碍筛查  

Adolescent personality disorder screening among university freshmen of multi-ethnic minority groups

作　　者：罗晓敏[1] 郑睿敏[1] 陈静宜[1] 吴久玲[1] 孙文墅 陈瑛[3] 马兰[1] 王淑霞[1] LUO Xiao-min;ZHENG Rui-min;CHEN Jing-yi;WU Jiu-ling;SUN Wen-shu;CHEN Ying;MA Lan;WANG Shu-xia(National Center for Women and Children＇s Health, Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention, Beijing 100081, China;University Hospital, Minzu University of China, Beijing 100081, China;Beijing Friendship Hospital, Beijing 100050, China)

机构地区：[1]中国疾病预防控制中心妇幼保健中心,北京100081 [2]中央民族大学,北京100081 [3]北京友谊医院,北京100050

出　　处：《中国妇幼健康研究》2018年第4期407-411,共5页Chinese Journal of Woman and Child Health Research

摘　　要：目的了解中国多民族大一新生的人格障碍分布、严重程度及可能的影响因素。方法于2014年9月在北京某高校,使用整群抽样方法抽取了2014年新入学的2 823名大一新生。使用人格诊断问卷(PDQ-4)作为人格障碍筛查工具,使用自行设计的调查问卷收集学生一般情况。结果多民族大一新生PDQ-4总分为(23.34±10.44);分量表分值中,分裂型(t=15.46,P=0.000)、偏执型(t=12.49,P=0.000)、依赖型(t=6.69,P=0.000)、表演型(t=12.92,P=0.000)、边缘型(t=2.83,P=0.005)分值高于普通人群,且差异有显著性。总体人格障碍阳性检出率为25.67%(666),检出率最高的前三项是强迫型44.29%(1149)、回避型31.84%(826)和偏执型30.30%(786),最低是边缘型5.74%(149)。男性总体人格障碍阳性率明显高于女性(χ~2=6.42,P=0.011);男性在分裂型、表演型、自恋型、边缘型和反社会型的检出率高于女性(χ~2值分别为12.61、4.79、27.85、17.19、75.48,均P<0.05);女性回避型检出率高于男性(χ~2=17.65,P<0.05);偏执型检出率少数民族学生高于汉族学生(χ~2=4.76,P=0.029),表演型检出率汉族学生高于少数民族学生(χ~2=5.75,P=0.016),差异均有显著性。结论在中国大一新生、不同民族和男性是人格障碍发生的重点人群,有必要有针对性的开展干预研究,在人格尚未最终形成的关键时期减少人格障碍的发生,避免后续影响。Objective To learn the personality disorder prevalence, severity and possible influencing factors of ethnic minority freshmen. Methods In September 2014, 2 823 freshmen of class 2014 were selected by using the cluster sampling method in a university in Beijing. Personality diagnostic questionnaire （PDQ4） was used as a personality disorder screening tool and a self- designed questionnaire was used to collect the general information of the students. Results The total PDQ-4 score of the freshmen was 23.34±10.44. For the subscales, types of schizotypal （t=15.46,P=0.000）, paranoid （t= 12.49,P=0.000）, dependent （t= 6.69, P = 0.000）, histrionic （t = 12.92, P = 0. 000）, and borderline （t = 2.83, P = 0. 005） had higher score than the general population, and the difference was significantly. The positive rate of overall personality disorder was 25.67% （666）. The top three types were obsessive compulsive, avoidant, and paranoid. The positive rates for these three were 44.29% （1 149）, 31.84% （826） and 30.30% （786）, respectively. The lowest was borderline, and the rate of which was 5.74% （149）. The overall positive rate of personality disorder in male was higher than in female （χ^2= 6.42, P = 0.011）. Male students had higher rates on schizotypal, histrionic, narcissistic, borderline and antisocial than female peers （all P〈0.05）. Meanwhile, the later had higher rate on avoidant than the former （χ^2= 17.65, P〈0.05）. The positive rate of paranoid type in the ethnic minority students was higher than in students of Han nationality （χ^2 =4.76,P =0.029）, while students of Han nationality had higher rate on histrionic than the ethnic minority students （χ^2=5.75, P = 0. 016）. Both differences were statistically significant. Conclusion Freshmen, ethnic minority students, and male students are key groups in which personality disorders occur. It is necessary to conduct targeted research and intervention so as to reduce the incidence of personality disorders in the k

关 键 词：多民族 大一新生 青少年 人格障碍 筛查 

分 类 号：R749[医药卫生—神经病学与精神病学]