四川精神卫生
四川精神衛生
사천정신위생
Sichuan Mental Health
2015年
5期
417-419
,共3页
氟伏沙明%氯米帕明%躯体化障碍
氟伏沙明%氯米帕明%軀體化障礙
불복사명%록미파명%구체화장애
Fluvoxamine%Clomipramine%Somatization disorder
目的：评价氟伏沙明与氯米帕明对躯体化障碍的临床疗效和不良反应。方法采用随机数字表法将符合《中国精神障碍分类与诊断标准（第3版）》（CCMD -3）的92例躯体化障碍患者分为两组，分别给予氟伏沙明与氯米帕明治疗。氟伏沙明剂量（227.3±53.8）mg/ d，氯米帕明剂量（205.5±32.7）mg/ d。观察期8周。采用汉密尔顿焦虑量表（HAMA）、汉密尔顿抑郁量表（HAMD）、副反应量表（TESS）评定疗效和不良反应。结果治疗8周后，氟伏沙明组与氯米帕明组总有效率比较差异无统计学意义（73.91% vs.69.57%，P >0.05）；两组 HAMA、HAMD 总评分及躯体性焦虑因子评分均较治疗前低（P <0.05或0.01）。治疗2周末，氟伏沙明组 HAMA 评分及躯体性焦虑因子评分均较氯米帕明组低（P <0.05）。两组不良反应发生率比较差异有统计学意义（28.26% vs.60.87%，P <0.05）。结论氟伏沙明与氯米帕明治疗躯体化障碍疗效相当，氟伏沙明起效更快，不良反应更少。
目的：評價氟伏沙明與氯米帕明對軀體化障礙的臨床療效和不良反應。方法採用隨機數字錶法將符閤《中國精神障礙分類與診斷標準（第3版）》（CCMD -3）的92例軀體化障礙患者分為兩組，分彆給予氟伏沙明與氯米帕明治療。氟伏沙明劑量（227.3±53.8）mg/ d，氯米帕明劑量（205.5±32.7）mg/ d。觀察期8週。採用漢密爾頓焦慮量錶（HAMA）、漢密爾頓抑鬱量錶（HAMD）、副反應量錶（TESS）評定療效和不良反應。結果治療8週後，氟伏沙明組與氯米帕明組總有效率比較差異無統計學意義（73.91% vs.69.57%，P >0.05）；兩組 HAMA、HAMD 總評分及軀體性焦慮因子評分均較治療前低（P <0.05或0.01）。治療2週末，氟伏沙明組 HAMA 評分及軀體性焦慮因子評分均較氯米帕明組低（P <0.05）。兩組不良反應髮生率比較差異有統計學意義（28.26% vs.60.87%，P <0.05）。結論氟伏沙明與氯米帕明治療軀體化障礙療效相噹，氟伏沙明起效更快，不良反應更少。
목적：평개불복사명여록미파명대구체화장애적림상료효화불량반응。방법채용수궤수자표법장부합《중국정신장애분류여진단표준（제3판）》（CCMD -3）적92례구체화장애환자분위량조，분별급여불복사명여록미파명치료。불복사명제량（227.3±53.8）mg/ d，록미파명제량（205.5±32.7）mg/ d。관찰기8주。채용한밀이돈초필량표（HAMA）、한밀이돈억욱량표（HAMD）、부반응량표（TESS）평정료효화불량반응。결과치료8주후，불복사명조여록미파명조총유효솔비교차이무통계학의의（73.91% vs.69.57%，P >0.05）；량조 HAMA、HAMD 총평분급구체성초필인자평분균교치료전저（P <0.05혹0.01）。치료2주말，불복사명조 HAMA 평분급구체성초필인자평분균교록미파명조저（P <0.05）。량조불량반응발생솔비교차이유통계학의의（28.26% vs.60.87%，P <0.05）。결론불복사명여록미파명치료구체화장애료효상당，불복사명기효경쾌，불량반응경소。
Objective To evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety of fluvoxamine and clomipramine in treatment of somatization disorder. Methods 92 patients according to CCMD - 3 criteria were enrolled in this study. 46 patients taking Fluvoxamine and anoth-er 46 patients having clomipramine for 8 weeks. The efficacy was evaluated by Hamilton Anxiety Scale(HAMA)and Hamilton Depres-sion Scale(HAMD),and safety was evaluated by Treatment Emergent Symptom Scale(TESS). Results After 8 weeks,fluvoxamine had similar efficacy to clomipramine(73. 91% vs. 69. 57% ,P > 0. 05),and the total scores of HAMD and HAMA,Somatic anxiety fac-tor scores were lower than before treatment(P < 0. 05 or 0. 01). At the end of 2nd week,the total scores of HAMA and Somatic anxiety factor score of fluvoxamine group were lower than clomipramine group. The adverse reaction of fluvoxamine were less and milder (28. 26% vs. 60. 87% ,P < 0. 05). Conclusion The efficacy of the two drugs is quite the same in treatment of somatization disorder. Fluvoxamine has rapid effect and fewer adverse reaction in the treatment.
