RESUMEN
PURPOSE: To explore the differences in facial emotion recognition among patients with unipolar depression (UD), bipolar depression (BD), and normal controls. METHODS: Thirty patients with UD and 30 patients with BD, respectively, were recruited in Zhumadian Second People's Hospital from July 2018 to August 2019. Fifteen groups of facial expressions including happiness, sadness, anger, surprise, fear, and disgust were identified. RESULTS: A single-factor ANOVA was used to analyze the facial expression recognition results of the three groups, and the differences were found in the happy-sad (P = 0.009), happy-angry (P = 0.001), happy-surprised (P = 0.034), and disgust-surprised (P = 0.038) facial expression groups. The independent sample T-test analysis showed that compared with the normal control group, there were differences in the happy-sad (P = 0.009) and happy-angry (P = 0.009) groups in patients with BD, and the accuracy of facial expression recognition was lower than the normal control group. Compared with patients with UD, there were differences between the happy-sad (P = 0.005) and happy-angry (P = 0.002) groups, and the identification accuracy of patients with UD was higher than that of patients with BD. The time of facial expression recognition in the normal control group was shorter than that in the patient group. Using happiness-sadness to distinguish unipolar and BDs, the area under the ROC curve (AUC) is 0.933, the specificity is 0.889, and the sensitivity is 0.667. Using happiness-anger to distinguish unipolar and BD, the AUC was 0.733, the specificity was 0.778, and the sensitivity was 0.600. CONCLUSION: Patients with UD had lower performance in recognizing negative expressions and had longer recognition times. Those with BD had lower accuracy in recognizing positive expressions and longer recognition times. Rapid facial expression recognition performance may be as a potential endophenotype for early identification of unipolar and BD.
RESUMEN
Objective: Considerable evidence has shown that facial expression recognition ability and cognitive function are impaired in patients with depression. We aimed to investigate the relationship between facial expression recognition and cognitive function in patients with depression. Methods: A total of 51 participants (i.e., 31 patients with depression and 20 healthy control subjects) underwent facial expression recognition tests, measuring anger, fear, disgust, sadness, happiness, and surprise. The Chinese version of the MATRICS Consensus Cognitive Battery (MCCB), which assesses seven cognitive domains, was used. Results: When compared with a control group, there were differences in the recognition of the expressions of sadness (p = 0.036), happiness (p = 0.041), and disgust (p = 0.030) in a depression group. In terms of cognitive function, the scores of patients with depression in the Trail Making Test (TMT; p < 0.001), symbol coding (p < 0.001), spatial span (p < 0.001), mazes (p = 0.007), the Brief Visuospatial Memory Test (BVMT; p = 0.001), category fluency (p = 0.029), and continuous performance test (p = 0.001) were lower than those of the control group, and the difference was statistically significant. The accuracy of sadness and disgust expression recognition in patients with depression was significantly positively correlated with cognitive function scores. The deficits in sadness expression recognition were significantly correlated with the TMT (p = 0.001, r = 0.561), symbol coding (p = 0.001, r = 0.596), maze (p = 0.015, r = 0.439), and the BVMT (p = 0.044, r = 0.370). The deficits in disgust expression recognition were significantly correlated with impairments in the TMT (p = 0.005, r = 0.501) and symbol coding (p = 0.001, r = 0.560). Conclusion: Since cognitive function is impaired in patients with depression, the ability to recognize negative facial expressions declines, which is mainly reflected in processing speed, reasoning, problem-solving, and memory.