中国基层医药
中國基層醫藥
중국기층의약
CHINESE JOURNAL OF PRIMARY MEDICINE AND PHARMACY
2013年
14期
2163-2164
,共2页
躯体型障碍%米氮平%氟西汀
軀體型障礙%米氮平%氟西汀
구체형장애%미담평%불서정
Somatoform disorders%Mirtazapine%Fluoxetine
目的 比较米氮平和氟西汀治疗躯体形式障碍的疗效和安全性.方法 将82例诊断躯体形式障碍的患者按入组先后顺序,分为米氮平组(41例)和氟西汀组(41例),进行开放式临床对照研究,疗程均为6周,采用汉密尔顿抑郁量表(HAMD)和症状自评量表(SCL-90)评价疗效,采用药物副反应量表(TESS)评价不良反应.结果 米氮平组临床总有效率为88％,氟西汀组为80％,差异无统计学意义(x2=0.13,P＞0.05).治疗1周时,通过症状自评量表测查,在躯体化、焦虑及总分项中,米氮平组的得分较治疗前下降明显于氟西汀组,差异有统计学意义(t =2.97、3.01、3.73,均P＜0.05)；第6周时,在躯体化、人际关系、抑郁、焦虑、恐怖及总分项中,米氮平组的得分较治疗前下降明显于氟西汀组,差异有统计学意义(t=2.01、2.36、3.25、3.62、2.17、3.84,均P＜0.05).米氮平组未见明显药物不良反应；氟西汀组出现4例药物不良反应.结论 米氮平治疗躯体形式障碍患者较氟西汀起效快,药物不良反应小.
目的 比較米氮平和氟西汀治療軀體形式障礙的療效和安全性.方法 將82例診斷軀體形式障礙的患者按入組先後順序,分為米氮平組(41例)和氟西汀組(41例),進行開放式臨床對照研究,療程均為6週,採用漢密爾頓抑鬱量錶(HAMD)和癥狀自評量錶(SCL-90)評價療效,採用藥物副反應量錶(TESS)評價不良反應.結果 米氮平組臨床總有效率為88％,氟西汀組為80％,差異無統計學意義(x2=0.13,P＞0.05).治療1週時,通過癥狀自評量錶測查,在軀體化、焦慮及總分項中,米氮平組的得分較治療前下降明顯于氟西汀組,差異有統計學意義(t =2.97、3.01、3.73,均P＜0.05)；第6週時,在軀體化、人際關繫、抑鬱、焦慮、恐怖及總分項中,米氮平組的得分較治療前下降明顯于氟西汀組,差異有統計學意義(t=2.01、2.36、3.25、3.62、2.17、3.84,均P＜0.05).米氮平組未見明顯藥物不良反應；氟西汀組齣現4例藥物不良反應.結論 米氮平治療軀體形式障礙患者較氟西汀起效快,藥物不良反應小.
목적 비교미담평화불서정치료구체형식장애적료효화안전성.방법 장82례진단구체형식장애적환자안입조선후순서,분위미담평조(41례)화불서정조(41례),진행개방식림상대조연구,료정균위6주,채용한밀이돈억욱량표(HAMD)화증상자평량표(SCL-90)평개료효,채용약물부반응량표(TESS)평개불량반응.결과 미담평조림상총유효솔위88％,불서정조위80％,차이무통계학의의(x2=0.13,P＞0.05).치료1주시,통과증상자평량표측사,재구체화、초필급총분항중,미담평조적득분교치료전하강명현우불서정조,차이유통계학의의(t =2.97、3.01、3.73,균P＜0.05)；제6주시,재구체화、인제관계、억욱、초필、공포급총분항중,미담평조적득분교치료전하강명현우불서정조,차이유통계학의의(t=2.01、2.36、3.25、3.62、2.17、3.84,균P＜0.05).미담평조미견명현약물불량반응；불서정조출현4례약물불량반응.결론 미담평치료구체형식장애환자교불서정기효쾌,약물불량반응소.
Objective To compare the efficacy and safety of mirtazapine and fluoxetine in the treatment of somatoform disorders.Methods 82 patients were randomly divideded into mirtazapine group and fluoxetine group,all the patients were treated for 6 weeks.The efficacy was evaluated with Hamilton depression rating scale and symptom checklist,the side effects were evaluated with treatment emergent symptom scale.Results The total effective rate of the mirtazapine group was 88％.The total effective rate of the fluoxetine group was 80％.There was no difference between the two groups in efficacy (x2 =0.13,P ＞ 0.05).After the first week of treatment,by Symptom checklist,somatization,anxiety and total score of mirtazapine group were significantly lower than the fluoxetine group (t =2.97,3.01,3.73,all P ＜ 0.05).After the sixth week of treatment,somatization,interpersonal,depression,anxiety,fear and total score of mirtazapine group were significantly lower than the fluoxetine group (t =2.01,2.36,3.25,3.62,2.17,3.84,all P ＜ 0.05).Mirtazapine group had no significant adverse drug reactions.Fluoxetine group had four cases of adverse drug reactions.Conclusion Mirtazapine in the treatment of patients with somatoform disorders has more rapid onset and drug side effects is less than fluoxetine.
