机构地区:[1]首都医科大学附属北京安定医院急诊科,100088 [2]首都医科大学附属北京安定医院成瘾病房,100088 [3]首都医科大学附属北京安定医院抑郁症治疗中心,100088 [4]首都医科大学附属北京安定医院护理部,100088 [5]首都医科大学附属北京安定医院国家精神疾病医学中心、国家精神心理疾病临床医学研究中心,北京100088
出 处:《神经疾病与精神卫生》2025年第2期116-122,共7页Journal of Neuroscience and Mental Health
基 金:首都医科大学科研培育基金项目(PYZ22158);国家临床重点专科建设项目(3-2-2021-PT40)。
摘 要:目的探讨青少年心境障碍患者发生自伤自杀行为的家庭影响因素。方法选取2020年12月—2021年12月在首都医科大学附属北京安定医院住院治疗的137例青少年心境障碍患者为研究对象。采用一般资料调查表、青少年非自杀性自伤行为问卷(ANSAQ)、巴瑞特冲动性人格量表(BIS)、家庭功能评定量表(FAD)、简式父母教养方式问卷中文版(s-EMBU)评估患者的非自杀自伤性行为、冲动性人格特征、家庭功能存在的问题、父母教养方式的质量。根据患者过去1年是否有自伤自杀行为,将患者分为无自伤自杀组(n=46)和自伤自杀组(n=91)。采用二项Logistic回归分析探讨导致自伤自杀行为的影响因素。结果自伤自杀组≤16岁患者占比高于无自伤自杀组,差异有统计学意义(χ^(2)=3.967,P=0.046);与无自杀自伤组相比,自伤自杀组患者BIS运动冲动性[(29.44±7.23)分比(24.96±7.06)分]、s-EMBU拒绝维度母亲和父亲[(11.52±5.08)分比(9.53±3.36)分,(11.08±4.51)分比(9.50±3.81)分]得分高,差异有统计学意义(t=3.436、2.380、1.989;P<0.05);与无自伤自杀组相比,自伤自杀组BIS认知冲动性和无计划冲动性[分别为(29.84±7.84)分比(34.02±8.08)分,(27.64±8.94)分比(31.93±8.54)分]、FAD总的功能因子[(28.59±3.14)分比(29.96±3.15)分]、s-EMBU情感关怀维度父亲和母亲[分别为(17.03±5.80)分比(19.18±5.07)分,(18.33±5.52)分比(20.33±4.73)分]得分低,差异有统计学意义(t=-2.902、-2.682、-2.385、-2.082、-2.083;均P<0.05)。二项Logistic回归分析结果显示,家族史阳性(OR=3.061,95%CI=1.086~8.632)、BIS运动冲动性因子评分高(OR=1.090,95%CI=1.028~1.156),FAD总的功能因子(OR=0.861,95%CI=0.749~0.990)和s-EMBU情感关怀-父亲评分低(OR=0.914,95%CI=0.846~0.987)是青少年心境障碍患者发生自伤自杀行为的影响因素(均P<0.05)。结论家族史阳性、性格冲动、父亲对孩子的情感接纳与支持差、家庭功能差的青少年心�Objective To explore the family influencing factors of self-injury suicide behavior in adolescents with mood disorders.Methods From December 2020 to December 2021,137 adolescents with mood disorders in Beijing Anding Hospital,Capital Medical University were selected for the study.The General Information Questionnaire,Adolescent Non-Suicidal Self-Injury Assessment Questionnaire(ANSAQ),Barratt Impulsiveness Scale(BIS),Family Assessment Device(FAD),and Short-Egna Minnenav Barndoms Uppfostran(s-EMBU)were used to assess the patients'non-suicidal self-injury behaviors,impulsive personality traits,problems with family functioning,and quality of parenting style.Patients were categorized into no-suicidal self-injury group(n=46)and self-injury suicide group(n=91)based on whether or not they had self-injury suicide behavior in the past year.Factors influencing self-injury suicide behavior were analyzed using binomial Logistic regression.Results There were more patients≤16 years of age in self-injury suicide group than in no-suicidal self-injury group,and the difference was statistically significant(χ^(2)=3.967,P=0.046).Compared with no-suicidal self-injury group,patients in self-injury suicide group had higher BIS motor impulsivity scores[(29.44±7.23)vs.(24.96±7.06)],s-EMBU rejection subscale maternal and paternal scores[(11.52±5.08)vs.(9.53±3.36),and(11.08±4.51)vs.(9.50±3.81)]with statistically significant differences(t=3.436,2.380,1.989;P<0.05).Compared to no-suicidal self-injury group,self-injury suicide group had lower BIS cognitive impulsivity and unplanned impulsivity scores[(29.84±7.84)vs.(34.02±8.08),(27.64±8.94)vs.(31.93±8.54)],FAD total functioning factor scores[(28.59±3.14)vs.(29.96±3.15)],and s-EMBU emotional warmth subscale paternal and maternal scores[(17.03±5.80)vs.(19.18±5.07),and(18.33±5.52)vs.(20.33±4.73)],and the differences were statistically significant(t=-2.902,-2.682,-2.385,-2.082,-2.083;P<0.05).Binomial Logistic regression showed that positive family history[OR=3.061,95%CI(1.086,8.
分 类 号:R749[医药卫生—神经病学与精神病学]
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...