心血管康复医学杂志
心血管康複醫學雜誌
심혈관강복의학잡지
Chinese Journal of Cardiovascular Rehabilitation Medicine
2015年
5期
485-488
,共4页
牛文堂%王攀%万康%李健
牛文堂%王攀%萬康%李健
우문당%왕반%만강%리건
心肌桥%焦虑%抑郁
心肌橋%焦慮%抑鬱
심기교%초필%억욱
Myocardial bridging%Anxiety%Depression
目的：探讨心理疏导和药物干预对心肌桥患者焦虑抑郁的影响。方法：126例行冠脉造影确定为心肌桥的患者被分为：常规治疗组（62例）和心理干预组[64例，在常规治疗基础上给予心理疏导和氟哌噻吨美利曲辛片（黛力新）和舍曲林治疗]。另选择40位冠脉造影正常者作为正常对照组，干预前后采用 Zung焦虑自评量表（SAS）和抑郁自评量表（SDS）对三组进行焦虑抑郁评估，并进行统计学比较。结果：干预前常规治疗组和心理干预组之间SAS和SDS标准分无显著差异（ P＞0.05），但均明显高于正常对照组[SAS：（50.38±7.10）分、（49.78±7.42）分比（25.70±3.80）分， SDS：（48.5±7.43）分、（47.67±8.12）分比（26.47±4.10）分， P均＜0.01]。干预后心理干预组患者的SAS和SDS标准分均比干预前明显降低（ P＜0.01），且明显低于常规治疗组标准分[SAS：（40.84±6.23）分比（50.88±8.63）分， SDS：（39.82±5.84）分比（50.69±8.48）分]（ P均＜0.01）。结论：心理疏导加上药物干预可明显减轻或缓解心肌桥患者焦虑和抑郁情绪。
目的：探討心理疏導和藥物榦預對心肌橋患者焦慮抑鬱的影響。方法：126例行冠脈造影確定為心肌橋的患者被分為：常規治療組（62例）和心理榦預組[64例，在常規治療基礎上給予心理疏導和氟哌噻噸美利麯辛片（黛力新）和捨麯林治療]。另選擇40位冠脈造影正常者作為正常對照組，榦預前後採用 Zung焦慮自評量錶（SAS）和抑鬱自評量錶（SDS）對三組進行焦慮抑鬱評估，併進行統計學比較。結果：榦預前常規治療組和心理榦預組之間SAS和SDS標準分無顯著差異（ P＞0.05），但均明顯高于正常對照組[SAS：（50.38±7.10）分、（49.78±7.42）分比（25.70±3.80）分， SDS：（48.5±7.43）分、（47.67±8.12）分比（26.47±4.10）分， P均＜0.01]。榦預後心理榦預組患者的SAS和SDS標準分均比榦預前明顯降低（ P＜0.01），且明顯低于常規治療組標準分[SAS：（40.84±6.23）分比（50.88±8.63）分， SDS：（39.82±5.84）分比（50.69±8.48）分]（ P均＜0.01）。結論：心理疏導加上藥物榦預可明顯減輕或緩解心肌橋患者焦慮和抑鬱情緒。
목적：탐토심리소도화약물간예대심기교환자초필억욱적영향。방법：126례행관맥조영학정위심기교적환자피분위：상규치료조（62례）화심리간예조[64례，재상규치료기출상급여심리소도화불고새둔미리곡신편（대력신）화사곡림치료]。령선택40위관맥조영정상자작위정상대조조，간예전후채용 Zung초필자평량표（SAS）화억욱자평량표（SDS）대삼조진행초필억욱평고，병진행통계학비교。결과：간예전상규치료조화심리간예조지간SAS화SDS표준분무현저차이（ P＞0.05），단균명현고우정상대조조[SAS：（50.38±7.10）분、（49.78±7.42）분비（25.70±3.80）분， SDS：（48.5±7.43）분、（47.67±8.12）분비（26.47±4.10）분， P균＜0.01]。간예후심리간예조환자적SAS화SDS표준분균비간예전명현강저（ P＜0.01），차명현저우상규치료조표준분[SAS：（40.84±6.23）분비（50.88±8.63）분， SDS：（39.82±5.84）분비（50.69±8.48）분]（ P균＜0.01）。결론：심리소도가상약물간예가명현감경혹완해심기교환자초필화억욱정서。
Objective:To explore influence of psychological persuasion and drug intervention on anxiety and depres‐sion in patients with myocardial bridge .Methods:A total of 126 patients ,who were confirmed as had myocardial bridge by coronary angiography (CAG) ,were divided into routine treatment group (n=62) and psychological intervention group (n=64 ,received psychological persuasion ,flupentixol melitracen tablet and sertraline therapy based on routine treatment ) . Another 40 cases with normal CAG results were enrolled as normal control group ,three groups received anxiety and depres‐sion assessment using Zung self‐rating anxiety scale (SAS) and self‐rating depression scale (SDS) before and after interven‐tion ,and the results were compared among three groups .Results:Before intervention ,there were no significant difference in SAS and SDS standardized scores between routine treatment group and psychological intervention group (P>0.05) ,but they were significantly higher than those of normal control group [SAS:(50.38 ± 7.10) scores ,(49.78 ± 7.42) scores vs . (25.70 ± 3.80) scores ,SDS:(48.5 ± 7.43) scores ,(47.67 ± 8.12) scores vs .(26.47 ± 4.10) scores , P<0.01 all] .After intervention ,SAS and SDS standardized scores of psychological intervention group significantly reduced compared with be‐fore intervention (P<0.01) ,and they were significantly lower than those of routine treatment group [SAS:(40.84 ± 6.23) scores vs .(50.88 ± 8.63) scores ,SDS:(39.82 ± 5.84) scores vs .(50.69 ± 8.48) scores] ,P<0.01 all .Conclusion:Psychological persuasion combined drug intervention could significantly reduce or relieve anxiety and depression in patients with myocardial bridge .
