临床合理用药杂志
臨床閤理用藥雜誌
림상합리용약잡지
Chinese Journal of Clinical Rational Drug Use
2015年
26期
8-9
,共2页
伴躯体疼痛抑郁症%度洛西汀%氟西汀
伴軀體疼痛抑鬱癥%度洛西汀%氟西汀
반구체동통억욱증%도락서정%불서정
Depression with pain symptoms%Duloxetine%Fluoxetine
目的：比较度洛西汀与氟西汀治疗伴躯体疼痛症状的抑郁症的疗效及安全性。方法选取2013年8月-2014年8月医院收治的抑郁症伴躯体疼痛症状的患者72例。随机分为度洛西汀组和氟西汀组各36例，治疗8周。用汉密顿抑郁量表（HAMD）、疼痛量表（MOSPM）和不良反应量表（TESS）评定疗效及不良反应。结果治疗8周后2组 HAMD、MOSPM 评分较治疗前显著下降（P ﹤0.01），度洛西汀组 MOSPM 总分较氟西汀组下降更显著（P ﹤0.05），2组不良反应差异无统计学意义（P ﹥0.05）。结论度洛西汀与氟西汀治疗伴疼痛症状的抑郁症均有效，但以度洛西汀疗效更好。
目的：比較度洛西汀與氟西汀治療伴軀體疼痛癥狀的抑鬱癥的療效及安全性。方法選取2013年8月-2014年8月醫院收治的抑鬱癥伴軀體疼痛癥狀的患者72例。隨機分為度洛西汀組和氟西汀組各36例，治療8週。用漢密頓抑鬱量錶（HAMD）、疼痛量錶（MOSPM）和不良反應量錶（TESS）評定療效及不良反應。結果治療8週後2組 HAMD、MOSPM 評分較治療前顯著下降（P ﹤0.01），度洛西汀組 MOSPM 總分較氟西汀組下降更顯著（P ﹤0.05），2組不良反應差異無統計學意義（P ﹥0.05）。結論度洛西汀與氟西汀治療伴疼痛癥狀的抑鬱癥均有效，但以度洛西汀療效更好。
목적：비교도락서정여불서정치료반구체동통증상적억욱증적료효급안전성。방법선취2013년8월-2014년8월의원수치적억욱증반구체동통증상적환자72례。수궤분위도락서정조화불서정조각36례，치료8주。용한밀돈억욱량표（HAMD）、동통량표（MOSPM）화불량반응량표（TESS）평정료효급불량반응。결과치료8주후2조 HAMD、MOSPM 평분교치료전현저하강（P ﹤0.01），도락서정조 MOSPM 총분교불서정조하강경현저（P ﹤0.05），2조불량반응차이무통계학의의（P ﹥0.05）。결론도락서정여불서정치료반동통증상적억욱증균유효，단이도락서정료효경호。
Objective To compare the efficacy and safety of duloxetine and fluoxetine in the treatment of depression with pain symptoms. Methods 72 patients were randomly divided into duloxetine group(n = 36)and fluoxetine group(n = 36) for 8 weeks treatment. Hamilton rating scale for depression(HAMD),Medical outcomes study pain measurement(MOSPM) and treatment emergent symtom scale(TESS)were used to evaluate the efficacy and side effects. Results The total sores of HAMD and MOSPM in both group after 8 weeks treatment were significantly lower than those in baseline(P ﹤ 0. 01),and the total and somatic symptom sores of MOSPM in duloxetine group was significantly lower than that of fluoxetine group after 8 weeks treatment(P ﹤ 0. 05). There were no significant difference in side effect between these two groups(P ﹥ 0. 05). Conclu-sion Both duloxetine and fluoxetine were effective in the treatment of depression with pain symptoms,while,duloxetine is more effective.
