快速检索:        
    
在线办公系统
在线期刊
下载专区
排行榜
友情链接
扫描微信二维码,获取更多信息
罗和春,沈渔邨,贾云奎,候沂,陈光,张艾琳,舒良,何瑜,周东丰,牛宗新,刘铁峰,于江,李文通,周正保,杨坤英,臧明仁,包淑卿,张家兴,董群惠,谢治椽,张国忠,周红,张士忠,曹幸馀,姜兴邦.电针治疗133例抑郁症患者临床疗效观察[J].中国中西医结合杂志,1988,(2):77-80,68
电针治疗133例抑郁症患者临床疗效观察
Clinical Observation of Electro-Acupuncture on 133 Patients with Depression in Comparison with Tricyclic Amitriptyline
免费下载全文  查看/发表评论  下载PDF阅读器
  
DOI:
中文关键词:  阿米替林  反应性抑郁症  电针治疗  临床疗效观察  治疗后  显著性差异  抑郁量表  治疗机理  正常对照组  认知障碍
英文关键词:
基金项目:
作者单位
罗和春 北京医科大学精神卫生研究所 
沈渔邨 北京医科大学精神卫生研究所 
贾云奎 北京医科大学精神卫生研究所 
候沂 北京医科大学精神卫生研究所 
陈光 北京医科大学精神卫生研究所 
张艾琳 北京医科大学精神卫生研究所 
舒良 北京医科大学精神卫生研究所 
何瑜 北京医科大学精神卫生研究所 
周东丰 北京医科大学精神卫生研究所 
牛宗新 北京安定医院 
刘铁峰 北京安定医院 
于江 唐山开滦煤矿精神病院 
李文通 北京安定医院 
周正保 天津精神病防治院 
杨坤英 天津精神病防治院 
臧明仁 山东省精神病院 
包淑卿 山东省精神病院 
张家兴 山西省精神病院 
董群惠 西安市精神病防治院 
谢治椽 西安市精神病防治院 
张国忠 哈尔滨市第一专科医院 
周红 哈尔滨市第一专科医院 
张士忠 沈阳市精神病防治院 
曹幸馀 九省市抑郁症电针治疗协作研究组 
姜兴邦 九省市抑郁症电针治疗协作研究组 
摘要点击次数: 1437
全文下载次数: 1228
中文摘要:
      133例抑郁症患者接受电针百会、印堂穴治疗,与常用三环类抗抑郁药阿米替林治疗的108例进行双盲法对照。结果:按 Hamilton 抑郁量表评价两组治疗前后均分数变化的比较,电针组与对照组一样,治疗后均分数显著下降,治疗前后有显著性差异(P<0.01);而两组间治疗后均分数对比无显著性差异(P>0.05)。按中国传统评定疗效标准,电针组与阿米替林组显效率分别为75.2%与66.7%,经 X~2检验无显著性差异(P>0.05)。但电针组对焦虑躯体化症候群与认知障碍症候群及反应性抑郁症疗效,比阿米替林组好,且副作用少、适应症广。生化与电生理检查结果表明,两组治疗机理可能有所不同。
英文摘要:
      133 patients with depression were treated with electro-acupuncture(EA)at acupoints Baihui (Gv20)and Yintang(Ex-HN,also called Glabella)and antidepressant amitriptyline were studied in 108 cases with double blind control.Each selected and observed patient was tested with some rating scales.Neuroendocrine studies and EEG studies were carried out on 72 of 241 cases.Results and analysis:The studies revealed that the mean scores of both EA and control were reduced remarkably after treatment as compared with the mean scores before treatment.Statistical analysis showed P< 0.01,suggesting a significant difference before and after treatment in both groups,while the difference of score reading between them was insignificant,P>0.05.In order to observe the changes of score reading of each syndrome,7 syndromes in Hamilton’s Deprssion Scale were subdivided. There were significant differences before and after treatment in 7 syndromes of both groups.The therapeutic effectiveness of EA was better than that of control in anxiety syndrome and cognitive disturbance syndrome.The statistical analysis showedP<0.01,suggesting a significant difference. According to the analysis of effectiveness of different kinds of disease,reactive depression treated with EA was better than that of the control.In China,according to the method commonly used in an assessment of therapeutic effect,the markedly effective rate of EA was 75.2%,and 66.7% in control group.X~2 test showed that there was insignificant difference between EA and control(P> 0.05),suggesting that there was same therapeutic effect both in EA group and amitriptyline. However,the side-effect in EA group was few.So it is believed that EA is more useful for depression. In fact,EA is a new treatment for research,because the data of biochemical examination and EEG were different in these two groups.The mechanism of EA and amitriptyline perhaps is different also.
关闭