摘要
目的:比较电针结合重复经颅磁刺激(rTMS)与单纯rTMS治疗焦虑抑郁共病(CAD)的疗效差异。方法:将85例CAD患者随机分成两组,观察组(40例)予电针百会、印堂、神庭、神门、内关等穴,配合rTMS治疗;对照组(45例)予单纯rTMS治疗,采用汉密尔顿抑郁量表(HAMD)和焦虑量表(HAMA)于治疗前、治疗5天后、治疗10天后进行抑郁、焦虑评分,比较两组疗效。结果:治疗5天、10天后两组HAMA、HAMD评分均低于治疗前(均P<0.001),且治疗10天后观察组HAMA评分低于对照组(P<0.05)。治疗10天后观察组治疗抑郁、焦虑显效率分别为87.1%(27/31)、90.3%(28/31),明显高于对照组的61.8%(21/34)、61.8%(21/34)(均P<0.05)。结论:电针结合经颅磁刺激治疗焦虑抑郁共病效果肯定,较单纯rTMS治疗疗效佳。
Objective To compare the efficacy differences between integrative therapy of electroacupuncture and repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation （rTMS） and simple rTMS only in the treatment of eomorbid anxiety and depression （CAD）. Methods Eighty-five cases of CAD were randomized into two groups. The observation group （40 cases） was treated with electroacupuncture at Baihui （GV 20）, Yintang （EX-HN 3）. Shenting （GV 24）, Shenmen （HT 7） and Neiguan （PC 6） mainly, combined with rTMS. The control group （45 cases） was treated with simple rTMS. Separately, before treatment, after 5 days and 10 days treatment. Hemilton Depression Scale （HAMD） and Hemilton Anxiety Scale （HAMA） were used for the scoring of depression and anxiety. Additionally, the efficacies were compared between two groups. Results After 5 days,10 days treatment, the scores of HAMA, HAMD were reduced remarkably as compared with those before treatment in two groups （all P〈0. 001）, HAMA score in observation group was lower than that in control group after 10 days treatment （P〈0.05）. The remarkable effective rates of depression and anxiety in observation group those 10 days that treatment were 87.1% （27/31） and 90.3% （28/31） respectively, which were higher apparently than 61.8% （21/34） and 61.8% （21/34） in control group separately （both P〈0.05）. Conclusion The integrative therapy of eleetroaeupuneture and rTMS is definitely effective on CAD. This method is better than simple rTMS.
出处
《中国针灸》
CAS
CSCD
北大核心
2011年第4期294-298,共5页
Chinese Acupuncture & Moxibustion
关键词
焦虑症
抑郁症
电针
重复经颅磁刺激
随机对照试验
Anxiety
Depression
Electroaeupuncture
rTMS
Randomized Controlled Trial（RCT）
