目的 通过对比非流利型失语症患者口语命名障碍与语言功能恢复的关系,探讨非流利型失语症语言功能损伤的环节.为预测失语症的语言功能恢复和失语症的亚分类提供有益的方法.方法 选出16例口语图形命名得分相近的非流利型失语症患者,分别进行图形写名、听觉词/图匹配、视觉词/图匹配、听觉图/词核证、视觉图/词核证各项任务检测.2月后根据语言自然恢复程度的不同分为无明显好转组和好转组,比较无明显好转组及好转组上述各项语言命名任务间正确得分有无差异,分析影响语言恢复的机制.所有数据用SPSS 13.0软件包处理,检验两项任务间的得分差异用Wilcoxon分析方法,患者间及多项任务间得分差异比较应用Kruskal-Wallis分析方法.结果 语言功能恢复较差的11名患者是源于中心语义系统受损严重,另外4名语言功能恢复较好的患者源于语音输出系统受,两组在听觉词/图匹配、视觉词/图匹配、听觉图/词核证、视觉图/词核证各项任务上得分差异性具有明显统计学意义(P＜0.05).结论 语言损伤环节可能不同:中心语义系统受损者比语音输出系统受损者,语言功能恢复要差,因为语义层高于语音层.%Objective To explore the relationship between anamia and language functional recovery in sixteen nonfluent aphasic patients. Methods Sixteen patients selected oral picture naming scores similar type of non-fluent aphasic patients, were tested by respectively written picture naming, and auditory word/picture matching, visual word / picture matching, auditory picture/word verification auditory picture/word verification. Two months later according to the different levels of natural language recovery , the patients were divided into the non-improved group and improved group. All data was treated with SPSS 13. 0 software package, scores differences between two groups were treated with Wilcoxon analysis, scores difference between all patients and groups were treated with Kruskal-Wallis analysis. Results During the two groups, the scores from auditory word/picture matching, visual word / picture matching, auditory picture/word verification and auditory picture/word verification tests were different with statistical significance (P<0. 05). Conclusions the same type of nonfluent aphasia patients, oral naming similar obstacles, but the language functional recovery were different, this difference came mainly from the different aspect damage.
展开▼
