已在原发性进行性失语症(PPA)患者中描述了句子理解缺陷。然而,大多数在临床背景下更详细地解决这一领域的工具尚未改编并翻译成多种语言,对临床实践和跨语言研究构成限制。
■该研究旨在(1)测试巴西版本的语法接受测试(TROG2-Br)在PPA患者中检测形态句法缺陷的适用性;(2)调查测试中的表现与社会人口统计学和临床变量(年龄,多年的正规教育,和疾病持续时间);(3)表征表现为三种更常见的PPA变体(非流利,语义,和logopenic)和混合PPA(PPA-Mx),并分析TROG-2是否可能有助于区分这些临床特征。
■用TROG2-Br评估了74名认知健康的参与者和34名诊断为PPA的个体。总分(正确的项目,传递的块),类型,并对错误的类别进行了分析。
■在控件中,障碍得分与正规教育年限显著相关(Spearman'sr=0.33,p=004),但与年龄无关。在PPA中,年龄,教育,和疾病持续时间与测试中的表现没有显着相关。与PPA个体相比,对照在TROG2-Br上表现出明显更高的表现,并且他们的错误模式指出了轻度的一般认知处理困难(注意,工作记忆)。PPA错误类型指向非流畅或语法PPA中的处理和形态句法缺陷,(PPA-NF/A),对数型PPA(PPA-L),和PPA-Mx.语义PPA(PPA-S)亚组在质量上与对照更相似(处理困难和较低的形态句法错误百分比)。TROG2-Br表现出良好的内部一致性和并发有效性。
■我们的结果证实了其他人群中TROG-2的发现。讨论了受教育程度不同的典型老年人的表现,以及该测试的临床使用建议和未来的研究方向。
Sentence-comprehension deficits have been described in patients with primary progressive aphasia (PPA). However, most instruments to address this domain in more detail and in a clinical context have not been adapted and translated into several languages, posing limitations to clinical practice and cross-language research.
UNASSIGNED: The
study aimed to (1) test the applicability of the Brazilian version of the Test for Reception of Grammar (TROG2-Br) to detect morphosyntactic deficits in patients with PPA; (2) investigate the association between performance in the test and sociodemographic and clinical variables (age, years of formal education, and disease duration); (3) characterize the performance of individuals presenting with the three more common variants of PPA (non-fluent, semantic, and logopenic) and mixed PPA (PPA-Mx) and analyze whether TROG-2 may assist in the distinction of these clinical profiles.
UNASSIGNED: A total of 74 cognitively healthy participants and 34 individuals diagnosed with PPA were assessed with TROG2-Br. Overall scores (correct items, passed blocks), types, and categories of errors were analyzed.
UNASSIGNED: In controls, block scores were significantly correlated with years of formal education (Spearman\'s r = 0.33, p = 004) but not with age. In PPA, age, education, and disease duration were not significantly associated with performance in the test. Controls presented a significantly higher performance on TROG2-Br compared to PPA individuals and their errors pattern pointed to mild general cognitive processing difficulties (attention, working memory). PPA error types pointed to processing and morphosyntactic deficits in nonfluent or agrammatic PPA, (PPA-NF/A), logopenic PPA (PPA-L), and PPA-Mx. The semantic PPA (PPA-S) subgroup was qualitatively more similar to controls (processing difficulties and lower percentage of morphosyntactic errors). TROG2-Br presented good internal consistency and concurrent validity.
UNASSIGNED: Our results corroborate findings with TROG-2 in other populations. The performance of typical older adults with heterogeneous levels of education is discussed along with recommendations for clinical use of the test and future directions of research.