摘要
目的比较文拉法辛与米氮平对急性期抑郁症患者的起效时间、疗效和安全性。方法将64例急性期抑郁症患者随机分为两组,分别以文拉法辛与米氮平(各32例)治疗8周。用汉密尔顿抑郁量表(HAMD)和副反应量表(TESS)评价疗效和不良反应,以治疗1周末HAMD减分率≥20%评定起效时间。结果两组患者HAMD评分从第1周末起明显下降(P<0.01),文拉法辛组治疗1周末HAMD减分率≥20%25例(78.1%);米氮平组23例(71.8%),两组起效时间比较无显著性差异(P>0.050)。治疗8周末文拉法辛显效率75%,米氮平组为78.1%,两组疗效相当。副反应量表(TESS)比较无显著性差异(P>0.05)。结论文拉法辛与米氮平治疗急性期抑郁症起效迅速、疗效肯定,不良反应轻微,安全性好。
Objective To compare the works of time,efficacy and safety of venlafaxine and mirtazapine of on the treatment of patients with depression in the acute phase. Methods A total of 64 patients with depression in the acute period were randomly divided into two groups, they took venlafaxine or mirtazapine （all 32 cases）for 8 weeks. Using Hamilton depression rating scale （HAMD）and side effects scale（TESS）to therapeutic evaluation and adverse reaction to treatment on a weekend HAMD deducted rate quartile 20% for work of time. Results The HAMD scores of two groups of patients from the first weekend declined significantly （P〈0. 01） ,There were 25 cases of venlafaxine treatment group on a weekend HAMD whose reducing scores were more than 20%（78. l%）;and 23 cases of mirtazapine group（71.8%）,they had no significant difference（P〉0. 050）. At 8 weekend after treatment,significant efficiency was 75 % in venlafaxine group and 78.1 %in mirtazapine group,, there was no significant difference in side effects scale（TESS）（P〉0.05）. Conclusion Venlafaxine and mirtazapineon the treatment of depression in acute period arc workin~ a uicklv,effective ,mild adverse reactions,Rood safetv.
出处
《中国健康心理学杂志》
2012年第7期974-975,共2页
China Journal of Health Psychology
关键词
文拉法辛
米氮平
急性期抑郁
疗效
Venlafaxine
Mirtazapine
Depression in acute period
Curative effect
