切换至 "中华医学电子期刊资源库"

中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版) ›› 2026, Vol. 22 ›› Issue (03) : 194 -203. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.1673-5250.2026.03.002

专题论坛

抽动障碍严重程度与先兆冲动评估工具的研究现状
杨洁, 余春玫, 罗蓉()   
  1. 四川大学华西第二医院小儿神经科、出生缺陷与相关妇儿疾病教育部重点实验室,成都 610041
  • 收稿日期:2026-02-05 修回日期:2026-05-13 出版日期:2026-06-01
  • 通信作者: 罗蓉

Current status of assessment instruments for tic disorders severity and premonitory urges

Jie Yang, Chunmei Yu, Rong Luo()   

  1. Department of Pediatric Neurology, Key Laboratory of Birth Defects and Related Disease of Women and Children (Sichuan University), Ministry of Education, West China Second University Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610041, Sichuan Province, China
  • Received:2026-02-05 Revised:2026-05-13 Published:2026-06-01
  • Corresponding author: Rong Luo
  • Supported by:
    Key Research and Development Project of the Department of Science and Technology of Xizang Autonomous Region(XZ202601ZY0228)
引用本文:

杨洁, 余春玫, 罗蓉. 抽动障碍严重程度与先兆冲动评估工具的研究现状[J/OL]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2026, 22(03): 194-203.

Jie Yang, Chunmei Yu, Rong Luo. Current status of assessment instruments for tic disorders severity and premonitory urges[J/OL]. Chinese Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Pediatrics(Electronic Edition), 2026, 22(03): 194-203.

抽动障碍(TD)是一类常见的神经发育障碍,患儿的核心临床表现为运动性和(或)发声性抽动,常伴随先兆冲动(PU),即抽动发生前出现的躯体感觉异常。准确评估抽动症状严重程度及PU,对于TD疾病诊断、治疗决策及疗效评价具有重要意义。目前国内尚缺乏对TD严重程度与PU相关评估工具的系统梳理。笔者拟对国内外常用的TD严重程度评估量表,如耶鲁综合抽动严重程度量表(YGTSS)、耶鲁综合抽动严重程度量表修订版(YGTSS-R)、抽动秽语综合征量表(TSGS)、图雷特综合征量表(TODS)、父母版抽动问卷(PTQ),以及PU评估量表,如抽动症先兆冲动量表(PUTS)、个体化先兆冲动量表(I-PUTS)、抽动障碍先兆冲动量表修订版(PUTS-R)进行梳理,并对这8类量表的结构、适用人群、评估维度、心理测量学特性及应用场景等方面进行比较与评价,指出当前工具在临床实践与研究中的优势与局限,并强调在中国文化背景下开发本土化评估工具的必要性,旨在为本领域临床工作者和研究人员在选择TD患儿评估工具时提供理论依据和实践参考。

Tic disorders (TD) are common neurodevelopmental disorders characterized by motor and/or phonic tics, which are frequently accompanied by premonitory urges (PU)-abnormal somatic sensations preceding the occurrence of tics. Accurate assessment of tic symptom severity and PU is of great significance for disease diagnosis, treatment decisionmaking, and efficacy evaluation. However, there is still a lack of systematic review of relevant assessment tools in China. This review aims to systematically review commonly used TD severity assessment scales, including Yale global tic severity scale (YGTSS), Yale global tic severity scale-revised (YGTSSR), Tourette syndrome global scale (TSGS), Tourette′s disorder scale (TODS), parent tic questionnaire (PTQ), and PU assessment scales, including premonitory urge for tics scale (PUTS), individualized premonitory urge for tics scale (IPUTS), premonitory urge for tics scale-revised (PUTSR) at both domestic and international levels. We compare and evaluate these eight scales in terms of instrument structure, target population, assessment dimensions, psychometric properties, and application scenarios, identify the strengths and limitations of current tools in clinical practice and research, and emphasize the necessity of developing culturally adapted assessment tools within the Chinese context, so as to provide a theoretical basis and practical reference for clinicians and researchers when selecting assessment instruments for children with TD.

表1 YGTSS的评估者一致性ICC及7周重测信度比较
表2 YGTSS与YGTSS-R在频率、复杂性及干扰程度维度对TD患儿的评分描述对比
评分(分) YGTSS YGTSS-R
频率维度    
0 无抽动 无:无特定抽动迹象
1 罕见的:前一周出现了特定抽动行为。这些行为很少发生,通常不是每天发生。如果出现阵发性抽动,则为短暂而罕见的 最小的:特定抽动行为通常每天都会出现,但白天无抽动间隔时间很长。抽动可能偶尔发生,但一次持续的时间不会超过几分钟
2 偶尔的:特定抽动行为通常每天都会出现,但白天无抽动间隔时间很长。抽动可能偶尔发生,但一次持续时间不超过几分钟 轻度的:每天都会出现特定抽动行为,长达3 h的无抽搐间隔并不少见。抽动周期性发生,但通常仅限于一种情况
3 频繁的:每天都会出现特定抽动行为。长达3 h的无抽搐间隔并不少见。抽动发作经常发生,但可能仅限于一种情况 中度的:每天醒着的每个小时几乎都会出现特定抽动行为。抽动发作很常见,可能不限于一种情况
4 几乎总是这样:每天醒着的每个小时几乎都会出现特定抽动行为,持续抽动行为的周期也会定期发生。抽动发作很常见,并不局限于一种情况 明显的:醒着的每个小时都有特定抽动行为。抽动发作很常见,可能发生在多种情况下
5 总是:特定抽动行为几乎一直存在。无抽动的间歇时间难以确定,最长不超过5~10 min 重度的:特定抽动行为几乎一直存在。无抽动的间歇时间难以确定,最长不超过5~10 min。抽动发作非常常见,出现在多种情况下
复杂性维度    
0 无:如果存在,所有的抽动在性质上都很"简单"(突然、短暂、无目的) 无:无抽动
1 边缘:有些抽动在性质上并不明显"简单" 最小的:如果存在抽动,所有的抽动在性质上都很"简单"(突然、短暂、无目的)
2 轻度的:有些抽动明显"复杂"(外观上有目的性),表现为模仿简短的"自动性"行为,如伪装成修饰音节或简短的有意义的话语,如"啊哈""嗨" 轻度的:有些抽动在性质上并不明显"简单"
3 中度的:有些抽动更"复杂"(外观上更具有目的性和持续性),可能成管弦乐式发作且难以伪装,可能被合理化或"解释"成正常的行为或语言(轻拍,说"你打赌""亲爱的""FF""sh",模仿语言) 中度的:有些抽动明显"复杂"(外观上有目的性),表现为模仿简短的"自动性"行为,如伪装成修饰音节或简短的有意义的话语,如"啊哈""嗨"
4 明显的:有些抽动的性质非常"复杂",往往呈持续性系列发作,很难伪装,而且由于持续时间长、不常见、不恰当、怪异或淫秽的特征(长时间面部扭曲、触碰生殖器、回声、言语不典型、长时间反复说"你是什么意思",或说"fu"或"sh"),很难将其合理化为正常的行为或言语 明显的:有些抽动更"复杂"(外观上更具有目的性和持续性),可能成系列的发作且难以伪装,可能被合理化或"解释"成正常的行为或语言(轻拍,说"你打赌""亲爱的""FF""sh",模仿语言)
5 重度的:有些抽动涉及长时间的系列行为或言语,由于持续时间长和(或)极不寻常、不恰当、怪异或淫秽的特征,这些行为或言语不可能伪装或成功地合理化为正常行为(长时间的展示或话语,通常涉及污秽行为、自虐行为或污言秽语) 重度的:有些抽搐的性质非常"复杂",往往呈持续性系列发作,很难伪装,而且由于持续时间长、不常见、不恰当、怪异或淫秽的特征(长时间面部扭曲、触碰生殖器、回声、言语不典型及阵发性的猥亵行为、自虐行为或污言秽语),很难将其合理化为正常的行为或言语
干扰程度维度    
0 无影响 无:无抽动
1 最小的:不会打断正常行为或语言 最小的:当抽动出现时,不会打断流畅的行为或语言
2 轻度的:偶尔会打断正常行为或语言 轻度的:当抽动出现时,偶尔会打断流畅的行为或语言
3 中度的:经常会打断正常行为或语言 中度的:当抽动出现时,经常会打断流畅的行为或语言,但不会扰乱预期的行为或语言
4 明显的:经常会打断正常的行为或语言,偶尔会扰乱预期的活动或交流 明显的:当抽动出现时,经常会打断流畅的行为或语言,偶尔会扰乱预期的活动或交流
5 重度的:当抽动出现时,经常会扰乱预期的活动或交流 重度的:当抽动出现时,经常会扰乱预期的活动或交流
表3 目前主要用于评估TD严重程度量表(YGTSS、YGTSS-R、TSGS、TODS、PTQ)及PU评估量表(PUTS、I-PUTS、PUTS-R)的相关项目比较
量表名称(适用人群) 适用对象 评估者/评估时长(min) 抽动相关维度/其他维度 主要优势/与YGTSS的相关性
YGTSS(儿童、成年人) TD 临床人员/15~30 数量、频率、强度、复杂性、干扰程度/损害程度 金标准/-
YGTSS-R(儿童、成年人) TD 临床人员/15~30 数量、频率、强度、复杂性、干扰程度/损害程度 改进频率、复杂性、干扰维度的描述,减少偏倚/无相关性信息
TSGS(儿童、成年人) TS 临床人员/- 频率、破坏程度/行为、坐立难安、学校或职业问题 早期综合量表,涵盖行为维度/TSGS总分与YGTSS总分呈高度相关(r=0.86~0.90,P<0.05)[5]
TODS(儿童、青少年) TS 临床人员、父母/15~20 -/行为和情绪症状 纳入共病行为和情绪症状,可用于药物试验评估/TODS-CR/PR总分与YGTSS总分呈中度相关(r=0.49、0.47,P<0.05)[18]
PTQ(6~17岁人群) TD 父母/10~15 存在、频率、强度/- 操作简便,心理测量学特性良好/PTQ总分与YGTSS总分呈高度相关(r=0.72,P<0.05)[6]
PUTS(≥10岁,有研究支持≥6岁人群) TD 自评/5~10 频率、质量/- 首个PU评估量表/PUTS总分与YGTSS总分呈低至中度相关(r=0.06~0.31,P<0.05)[22]
I-PUTS(6~17岁人群) TD 临床人员/20~30 数量、频率、强度/身体部位 个体化评估,区分不同抽动对应的PU/PU强度评分与YGTSS抽动复杂性评分及抽动总分均呈低至中度相关(rs=0.26、0.23,P<0.05)[28]
PUTS-R(儿童、青少年、成年人) TD 自评/5~10 频率、质量/- 条目扩展,适用年龄层扩大/PUTS-R因子分与YGTSS总体损害率评分呈低至中度相关(rs=0.30~0.39,P<0.05)[30]
[1]
Ueda K, Black KJ. A comprehensive review of tic disorders in children[J]. J Clin Med, 2021, 10(11): 2479. DOI: 10.3390/jcm10112479.
[2]
Ricketts EJ, McGuire JF, Chang S, et al. Benchmarking treatment response in Tourette′s disorder: a psychometric evaluation and signal detection analysis of the parent tic questionnaire[J]. Behav Ther, 2018, 49(1): 46-56. DOI: 10.1016/j.beth.2017.05.006.
[3]
McGuire JF, Piacentini J, Storch EA, et al. Defining tic severity and tic impairment in tourette disorder[J]. J Psychiatr Res, 2021, 133: 93-100. DOI: 10.1016/j.jpsychires.2020.12.040.
[4]
Li Y, Woods DW, Gu Y, et al. Psychometric properties of the chinese version of the premonitory urge for tics scale: a preliminary report[J]. Front Psychol, 2021, 12: 573803. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.573803.
[5]
Martino D, Pringsheim TM, Cavanna AE, et al. Systematic review of severity scales and screening instruments for tics: critique and recommendations[J]. Mov Disord, 2017, 32(3): 467-473. DOI: 10.1002/mds.26891.
[6]
Chang S, Himle MB, Tucker BTP, et al. Initial psychometric properties of a brief parent-report instrument for assessing tic severity in children with chronic tic disorders[J]. Child Fam Behav Ther, 2009, 31(3): 181-191. DOI: 10.1080/07317100903099100.
[7]
Kircanski K, Woods DW, Chang SW, et al. Cluster analysis of the Yale global tic severity scale (YGTSS): symptom dimensions and clinical correlates in an outpatient youth sample[J]. J Abnorm Child Psychol, 2010, 38(6): 777-788. DOI: 10.1007/s10802-010-9410-5.
[8]
McGuire JF, Piacentini J, Storch EA, et al. A multicenter examination and strategic revisions of the Yale global tic severity scale[J]. Neurology, 2018, 90(19): e1711-e1719. DOI: 10.1212/WNL.0000000000005474.
[9]
Pietracupa S, Bruno E, Cavanna AE, et al. Scales for hyperkinetic disorders: a systematic review[J]. J Neurol Sci, 2015, 358(1-2): 9-21. DOI: 10.1016/j.jns.2015.08.1544.
[10]
Storch EA, Murphy TK, Fernandez M, et al. Factor-analytic study of the Yale global tic severity scale[J]. Psychiatry Res, 2007, 149(1-3): 231-237. DOI: 10.1016/j.psychres.2006.03.017.
[11]
McGuire JF, Sturm A, Ricketts EJ, et al. Cognitive control processes in behavior therapy for youth with Tourette′s disorder[J]. J Child Psychol Psychiatry, 2021, 63(3): 296-304. DOI: 10.1111/jcpp.13470.
[12]
Storch EA, Merlo LJ, Lehmkuhl H, et al. Further psychometric examination of the Tourette′s disorder scales[J]. Child Psychiatry Hum Dev, 2006, 38(2): 89-98. DOI: 10.1007/s10578-006-0043-4.
[13]
Jeon S, Walkup JT, Woods DW, et al. Detecting a clinically meaningful change in tic severity in Tourette syndrome: a comparison of three methods[J]. Contemp Clin Trials, 2013, 36(2): 414-420. DOI: 10.1016/j.cct.2013.08.012.
[14]
Szejko N, Robinson S, Hartmann A, et al. European clinical guidelines for tourette syndrome and other tic disorders-version 2.0. Part Ⅰ:assessment[J]. Eur Child Adolesc Psychiatry, 2022, 31(3): 383-402. DOI: 10.1007/s00787-021-01842-2.
[15]
Haas M, Jakubovski E, Fremer C, et al. Yale global tic severity scale (YGTSS): psychometric quality of the gold standard for tic assessment based on the large-scale emtics study[J]. Front Psychiatry, 2021, 12: 626459. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyt.2021.626459.
[16]
Harcherik DF, Leckman JF, Detlor J, et al. A new instrument for clinical studies of Tourette′s syndrome[J]. J Am Acad Child Psychiatry, 1984, 23(2): 153-160. DOI: 10.1097/00004583-198403000-00006.
[17]
Storch EA, Murphy TK, Geffken GR, et al. Reliability and validity of the Yale global tic severity scale[J]. Psychol Assess, 2005, 17(4): 486-491. DOI: 10.1037/1040-3590.17.4.486.
[18]
Shytle RD, Silver AA, Sheehan KH, et al. The Tourette′s disorder scale (TODS): development, reliability, and validity[J]. Assessment, 2003, 10(3): 273-287. DOI: 10.1177/1073191103255497.
[19]
Yadegar M, Guo S, Ricketts EJ, et al. Assessment and management of tic disorders in pediatric primary care settings[J]. Curr Dev Disord Rep, 2019, 6(3): 159-172. DOI: 10.1007/s40474-019-00168-8.
[20]
Rowe J, Yuen HK, Dure LS. Comprehensive behavioral intervention to improve occupational performance in children with tourette disorder[J]. Am J Occup Ther, 2013, 67(2): 194-200. DOI: 10.5014/ajot.2013.007062.
[21]
Walkup J, Rosenberg L, Brown J, et al. The validity of instruments measuring tic severity in Tourette′s syndrome[J]. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry, 1992, 31(3): 472-477. DOI: 10.1097/00004583-199205000-00013.
[22]
Woods DW, Piacentini J, Himle MB, et al. Premonitory urge for tics scale (PUTS): initial psychometric results and examination of the premonitory urge phenomenon in youths with tic disorders[J]. J Dev Behav Pediatr, 2005, 26(6): 397-403. DOI: 10.1097/00004703-200512000-00001.
[23]
Openneer TJC, Tárnok Z, Bognar E, et al. The premonitory urge for tics scale in a large sample of children and adolescents: psychometric properties in a developmental context. An emtics study[J]. Eur Child Adolesc Psychiatry, 2019, 29(10): 1411-1424. DOI: 10.1007/s00787-019-01450-1.
[24]
Steinberg T, Shmuel Baruch S, Harush A, et al. Tic disorders and the premonitory urge[J]. J Neural Transm (Vienna), 2010, 117(2): 277-284. DOI: 10.1007/s00702-009-0353-3.
[25]
Gulisano M, Calì P, Palermo F, et al. Premonitory urges in patients with gilles de la tourette syndrome: an Italian translation and a 7-year follow-up[J]. J Child Adolesc Psychopharmacol, 2015, 25(10): 810-816. DOI: 10.1089/cap.2014.0154.
[26]
Kim M, Chung SK, Yang JC, et al. Development of the Korean form of the premonitory urge for tics scale: a reliability and validity study[J]. Soa Chongsonyon Chongsin Uihak, 2020, 31(3): 146-153. DOI: 10.5765/jkacap.200013.
[27]
Forcadell E, Garcia-Delgar B, Nicolau R, et al. Tic disorders and premonitory urges: validation of the Spanish-language version of the premonitory urge for tics scale in children and adolescents[J]. Neurologia (Engl Ed), 2020: S0213-4853(20)30427-8. DOI: 10.1016/j.nrl.2020.09.006.
[28]
McGuire JF, McBride N, Piacentini J, et al. The premonitory urge revisited: an individualized premonitory urge for tics scale[J]. J Psychiatr Res, 2016, 83: 176-183. DOI: 10.1016/j.jpsychires.2016.09.007.
[29]
Che G, Ren W, McGuire JF, et al. Clinical evaluation of premonitory urges in children and adolescents using the Chinese version of individualized premonitory urge for tics scale[J]. Front Psychiatry, 2023, 14: 1224825. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyt.2023.1224825.
[30]
Baumung L, Müller-Vahl K, Dyke K, et al. Developing the premonitory urges for tic disorders scale-revised (PUTS-R)[J]. J Neuropsychol, 2021, 15(1): 129-142. DOI: 10.1111/jnp.12216.
[1] 骆云凯, 王文倩, 张珊珊, 陈建科, 潘陈可. 增强现实/虚拟现实情景模拟教学在住院医师规范化培训创伤超声重点评估教学中的应用[J/OL]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2026, 23(05): 394-399.
[2] 田雨, 罗蓉. 注意缺陷多动障碍功能缺陷评估量表的研究与临床应用现状[J/OL]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2026, 22(03): 185-193.
[3] 张猛, 李军, 李娜, 孙豪, 韩军涛. 小儿烧伤后手指掌侧瘢痕的临床分型与治疗方式探讨[J/OL]. 中华损伤与修复杂志(电子版), 2026, 21(03): 177-182.
[4] 杨碧涵, 赵丹, 夏京花, 贾云洋, 鲁雪梅. 髋部骨折患者术后康复效果的评估工具[J/OL]. 中华损伤与修复杂志(电子版), 2026, 21(03): 191-198.
[5] 薛驰, 段筱妍, 赵海洋, 赵向阳, 陈宝莉, 王志娟, 王芬, 王立娜, 周琴. 烧伤患者瘙痒评估工具的研究进展[J/OL]. 中华损伤与修复杂志(电子版), 2026, 21(03): 216-222.
[6] 张中喜, 邹加良, 张清池, 刘云钦, 江俊学. 儿童Pantaloon疝四例诊治报道并文献复习[J/OL]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2026, 20(03): 357-360.
[7] 石磊, 周香, 徐晓波, 宫付玉, 郑兰兰, 王航, 孙金浩, 房文盈. 慢性阻塞性肺疾病前期患者急性加重及再住院风险因素分析[J/OL]. 中华肺部疾病杂志(电子版), 2026, 19(03): 365-370.
[8] 麦吾兰江·麦麦提, 阿力娅·图拉丁, 吐尔洪江·吐逊. ABO血型不相容肝移植免疫抑制策略[J/OL]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2026, 15(02): 152-159.
[9] 邓玉飞, 王志鑫, 娄珂, 张林轩, 马桂春, 港措. 影像组学在肝癌精准诊断、疗效评估及治疗方案决策优化中应用[J/OL]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2026, 15(02): 172-180.
[10] 许萍萍, 宋丹阳, 李笑, 李辉, 王霞. 降钙素原与氨基末端B型利钠肽原联合评分对甲泼尼龙联合集成化血液净化治疗儿童严重脓毒症效果的分层价值[J/OL]. 中华肾病研究电子杂志, 2026, 15(02): 93-99.
[11] 王麒浩, 李文臣, 陈勃, 王海峰. 胶质淋巴系统在创伤性颅脑损伤病理进程中的研究进展与挑战[J/OL]. 中华神经创伤外科电子杂志, 2026, 12(02): 113-117.
[12] 张莉, 谢剑锋, 张学超, 王静, 王伟, 钱淑媛. 重度急性呼吸窘迫综合征患者客观评估导向的精准化镇痛镇静一例[J/OL]. 中华重症医学电子杂志, 2026, 12(02): 214-218.
[13] 中国研究型医院学会放射学专业委员会, 上海抗癌协会实体肿瘤聚焦诊疗专业委员会. 血管包裹肿瘤簇在肝细胞癌影像诊疗中的临床应用专家共识(2026年版)[J/OL]. 中华消化病与影像杂志(电子版), 2026, 16(03): 193-198.
[14] 翟君宇, 戚伟伟, 潮敏. 基于年龄分层的儿童面部外伤瘢痕差异化诊断与治疗[J/OL]. 中华诊断学电子杂志, 2026, 14(02): 98-102.
[15] 张思远, 宋晓微, 王丽君, 范玉华, 武剑. 人工智能赋能脑小血管病的血流动力学评估:研究进展与临床转化[J/OL]. 中华脑血管病杂志(电子版), 2026, 20(03): 327-333.
阅读次数
全文


摘要


AI


AI小编
你好!我是《中华医学电子期刊资源库》AI小编,有什么可以帮您的吗?