中华行为医学与脑科学杂志
中華行為醫學與腦科學雜誌
중화행위의학여뇌과학잡지
CHINESE JOURNAL OF BEHAVIORAL MEDICINE AND BRAIN SCIENCE
2014年
4期
327-330
,共4页
王亚光%汪作为%苑成梅%陈俊%吴志国%方贻儒
王亞光%汪作為%苑成梅%陳俊%吳誌國%方貽儒
왕아광%왕작위%원성매%진준%오지국%방이유
难治性抑郁症%文拉法辛%米氮平%成本-效果%成本-效用
難治性抑鬱癥%文拉法辛%米氮平%成本-效果%成本-效用
난치성억욱증%문랍법신%미담평%성본-효과%성본-효용
Treatment-resistant major depression%Venlafaxine%Mirtazapine%Cost-effectiveness%Cost-utility
目的 比较文拉法辛和米氮平治疗难治性抑郁症的成本-效果和成本-效用.方法 研究纳入难治性抑郁症患者105例,按照计算机生成的随机数随机分为文拉法辛组50例和米氮平组55例.计算8周治疗药费成本,以临床治愈率和临床有效率为治疗效果,质量调整生命年为治疗效用.采用描述性分析及非参数检验比较两组的成本-效果和成本-效用.结果 治疗8周每位抑郁症患者治疗成本文拉法辛组1 396.44元,米氮平组1 206.90元,前者比后者成本高189.54元.成本-效果分析显示,两组每成功治愈或治疗有效1%患者的成本接近(临床治愈率成本相差0.06元,临床有效率成本相差1.08元).成本-效用分析显示两组之间差异无统计学意义(生理机能Z=-0.15,P>0.05;心理健康Z=-0.54,P>0.05).结论 文拉法辛和米氮平治疗难治性抑郁症的成本-效果、成本-效用相似.
目的 比較文拉法辛和米氮平治療難治性抑鬱癥的成本-效果和成本-效用.方法 研究納入難治性抑鬱癥患者105例,按照計算機生成的隨機數隨機分為文拉法辛組50例和米氮平組55例.計算8週治療藥費成本,以臨床治愈率和臨床有效率為治療效果,質量調整生命年為治療效用.採用描述性分析及非參數檢驗比較兩組的成本-效果和成本-效用.結果 治療8週每位抑鬱癥患者治療成本文拉法辛組1 396.44元,米氮平組1 206.90元,前者比後者成本高189.54元.成本-效果分析顯示,兩組每成功治愈或治療有效1%患者的成本接近(臨床治愈率成本相差0.06元,臨床有效率成本相差1.08元).成本-效用分析顯示兩組之間差異無統計學意義(生理機能Z=-0.15,P>0.05;心理健康Z=-0.54,P>0.05).結論 文拉法辛和米氮平治療難治性抑鬱癥的成本-效果、成本-效用相似.
목적 비교문랍법신화미담평치료난치성억욱증적성본-효과화성본-효용.방법 연구납입난치성억욱증환자105례,안조계산궤생성적수궤수수궤분위문랍법신조50례화미담평조55례.계산8주치료약비성본,이림상치유솔화림상유효솔위치료효과,질량조정생명년위치료효용.채용묘술성분석급비삼수검험비교량조적성본-효과화성본-효용.결과 치료8주매위억욱증환자치료성본문랍법신조1 396.44원,미담평조1 206.90원,전자비후자성본고189.54원.성본-효과분석현시,량조매성공치유혹치료유효1%환자적성본접근(림상치유솔성본상차0.06원,림상유효솔성본상차1.08원).성본-효용분석현시량조지간차이무통계학의의(생리궤능Z=-0.15,P>0.05;심리건강Z=-0.54,P>0.05).결론 문랍법신화미담평치료난치성억욱증적성본-효과、성본-효용상사.
Objective To compare the cost-effectiveness and cost-utility of venlafaxine and mirtazapine in patients with treatment-resistant major depression (TRD).Methods One hundred and five patients with TRD were enrolled in this study and grouped into venlafaxine treatment (n=50) and mirtazapine treatment (n=55) based on the double-blind randomization scheme generated by computer.The treatment costs of antidepressants during 8 weeks were calculated,the rates of clinical response and remission were taken as treatment effectiveness,and the quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) as treatment utility.The descriptive analysis and nonparametric test were used to compare the cost-effectiveness and cost-utility of different groups.Results During 8 weeks,the treatment cost of antidepressant was ¥ 1 396.44 for venlafaxine and ¥ 1 206.90 mirtazapine,and the difference between two groups was ¥ 189.54.The cost-effectiveness ratios between venlafaxine and mirtazapine were very close (differed ¥ 0.06 for remission rate and ¥ 1.08 for response rate respectively).There was no significant difference for cost-utility ratios between two groups (physical functioning Z=-0.15,P>0.05 ; mental health Z=-0.54,P>0.05).Conclusion Both cost-effectiveness and cost-utility of venlafaxine in patients with TRD are close between venlafaxine and mirtazapine.