Àá½Ã¸¸ ±â´Ù·Á ÁÖ¼¼¿ä. ·ÎµùÁßÀÔ´Ï´Ù.
KMID : 0371020030360030255
Journal of Preventive Medicine and Public Health
2003 Volume.36 No. 3 p.255 ~ p.262
A Neurobehavioral Performance Assessment in Lacunar Infarction Case-control Study
Kim Ham-Gyum

Chang Soung-Hoon
Park Sue-Kyung
Lee Kun-Sei
Kim Hyeong-Su
Kim Hwa-Sun
Abstract
Objectives: We carried out tests for neurobehavior by using WHO-NCTB (neurobehavioral core test battery) and Perdue pegboard score test to identify differences between lacunar infarction cases and controls.

Methods: Among the subjects who underwent MRI between February 2001 and March 2002 in a university hospital located in Seoul and who were diagnosed only as lacunar infarction without any intracranial disease, 46 patients were selected as cases (male: 21, female: 25). Controls were selected who had no cerebrovascular disease on MRI by matching age (5 years), gender, and education (2 years) in a ratio of 1:1. Among WHO-NCTB, the following 5 tests and Perdue pegboard score test were used to categorize the study subjects: digit and symbol matching, simple reaction time, Benton visual retention, digit span, and Pursuit aiming test.

Results: Among the above 6 tests of neurobehavior, lacunar infarction cases showed lower score than controls except for the simple reaction time test.
As the controlling variables of multivariate analysis in the stepwise regression analysis, the followings were selected due to their significant association: age, education, BMI, gender, drinking, exercise, and systolic blood pressure. From multivariate regression analysis, there was significant difference (p<0.05) between lacunar infarction cases and controls in digit and symbol matching, Benton visual retention, digit span, pursuit aiming, and Perdue pegboard score test, but not in the score of simple reaction time test.

Conclusions: We suggest that the above 5 tests for neurobehavior, with the exception of the simple reaction time test, might be used as the basis for recommendation of further treatment and other neurological tests by the earlier detection for neurological abnormality in lacunar infarction.


Àüü ³úÁ¹ÁßÀÇ 15~20%¸¦ Â÷ÁöÇÏ°í ÀÖ´Â ¿­°ø¼º ³ú°æ»ö(lacunar infarction)Àº ÃÖ±Ù ³ú°æ»öÇü ³úÁ¹ÁßÀÇ Áõ°¡¿Í ´õºÒ¾î ±× Á߿伺ÀÌ Á¡Â÷ Áõ°¡ÇÏ°í Àִµ¥, 1³â À̳» ³ú°æ»öÀÌ Àç¹ßµÇ°Å³ª ³ëÀÎ, °íÇ÷¾Ð ¹× Ãʱ⠽ŰæÇÐÀû ÀÌ»ó°ú °°Àº °¨¼ö¼º ÀÎÀÚ°¡ ÀÖ´Â °æ¿ì ³ú°æ»ö Àç¹ß°ú Ç÷°ü¼º Ä¡¸Å ¹ß»ý À§ÇèÀÌ ÀÖ¾î »ïÂ÷¿¹¹æÀû Ãø¸é¿¡¼­ÀÇ ÀûÀýÇÑ Ã³Ä¡°¡ ÇÊ¿äÇÑ Áúº´ÀÌ´Ù. ±×·¸Áö¸¸ ¿­°ø¼º ³ú°æ»öÀº Áõ»óÀÌ ¾ø°Å³ª °æ¹ÌÇÑ °æ¿ì°¡ »ó´çÈ÷ ¸¹¾Æ ȯÀÚ ÀÚ½ÅÀÌ Ä¡·áÀÇ Á߿伺À» ´À³¢Áö ¸øÇÒ »Ó ¾Æ´Ï¶ó ÀÇ»çµéµµ ȯÀÚÀÇ °æ¹ÌÇÑ ½Å°æÇÐÀû ÀÌ»óÀ» ÀÎÁöÇÏÁö ¸øÇÏ¿© óġÀÇ ´çÀ§¼º¿¡ ´ëÇØ ¼³µæ·ÂÀÖ´Â ±Ù°Å¸¦ Á¦½ÃÇÒ ¼ö ¾ø¾î ÀûÀýÇÑ Ã³Ä¡°¡ ¹ÌºñÇÑ »óȲÀÌ´Ù. º» ¿¬±¸´Â ½Å°æÇÐÀû ÀÚ°¢ Áõ»óÀº ¾øÁö¸¸ MRI»ó ¿­°ø¼º ³ú°æ»öÀ¸·Î¸¸ Áø´ÜµÈ ȯÀÚ±ºÀÌ MRI»ó ÀÌ»ó¼Ò°ßÀÌ °üÂûµÇÁö ¾Ê´Â ´ëÁ¶±º¿¡ ºñÇÏ¿© ½Å°æÇൿ °Ë»ç»ó Â÷ÀÌ°¡ °üÂûµÉ °ÍÀ̶ó´Â °¡¼³À» ±¸¸íÇÏ°íÀÚ ÇÏ¿´´Ù. µû¶ó¼­ ³úÁ¹ÁßÀÇ Áõ»ó ¹× ÁõÈÄ ¾øÀÌ µÎ°³°ñ ¿Ü»ó ȤÀº µÎÅë, °æºÎ°­Á÷ µî°ú °°Àº ½Å°æÇÐÀû ÀÌ»óÀ¸·Î MRI¸¦ ÃÔ¿µÇÑ ´ë»óÀÚ Áß¿¡¼­ ´Ù¸¥ ÀÌ»ó ¾øÀÌ ¿­°ø¼º ³ú°æ»öÀ¸·Î¸¸ Áø´ÜµÈ ȯÀÚ±º°ú Ưº°ÇÑ ÀÌ»ó ¼Ò°ßÀÌ ¾ø´Â °ÍÀ¸·Î Áø´ÜµÈ ´ëÁ¶±º¿¡¼­ WHOÀÇ NCTB(neurobehavioral core test battery)°Ë»çÀÇ ÀÏºÎ¿Í Perdue pegboard score °Ë»ç¸¦ ½ÃÇàÇÏ¿´°í, ±× °á°ú ´ëÁ¶±º¿¡ ºñÇØ È¯ÀÚ±ºÀÇ ½Å°æÇൿ ÀÌ»óÀÌ Æò±Õ ¹× °¡Àå ºü¸¥ ´Ü¼ø¹ÝÀÀ½Ã°£ °Ë»ç¸¦ Á¦¿ÜÇÑ 5°³ °Ë»ç¿¡¼­ °üÂûµÇ¾ú´Ù.
º» °Ë»çÀÇ °á°ú´Â ÀÚ°¢ Áõ»óÀÌ ¾ø°Å³ª °æ¹ÌÇÑ Áõ»óÀ» È£¼ÒÇÏ´Â ¿­°ø¼º ³ú°æ»ö ȯÀÚµéÀÇ Â÷ÈÄ ÇÊ¿äÇÑ °Ë»çÀÇ ¼±º°°ú »ïÂ÷ ¿¹¹æÀû Ãø¸é¿¡¼­ óġÀÇ ±Ù°Å·Î¼­ È°¿ëµÉ ¼ö ÀÖÀ» °ÍÀÌ´Ù. ¶ÇÇÑ ÀÚ°¢ Áõ»óÀÌ ¾ø°Å³ª °æ¹ÌÇÑ Áõ»óÀÌ ÀÖÁö¸¸ ÁøÂû»ó ½Å°æÇÐÀû ÀÌ»ó ÁõÈĸ¦ °ÅÀÇ Ã£À» ¼ö ¾ø´Â ´ë»óÀÚ¿¡¼­ MRI °Ë»ç Çʿ伺ÀÇ ±Ù°Å¸¦ È®ÀÎÇÏ°íÀÚ ÇÏ´Â ´ë»óÀÚ¿¡°Ô ÀÌ¿ëµÉ ¼ö ÀÖÀ» °ÍÀ¸·Î »ç·áµÈ´Ù.
KEYWORD
Lacunar infarction, Test for neurobehavior, Case-control study
FullTexts / Linksout information
  
Listed journal information
ÇмúÁøÈïÀç´Ü(KCI) KoreaMed ´ëÇÑÀÇÇÐȸ ȸ¿ø