帕罗西汀联合心理干预治疗围绝经期抑郁症及对脑源性神经营养因子表达的影响

The effect of Paroxetine combined with psychological intervention in the treatment of peri-menopausal depression and the expression of brain-derived neurotrophic factor

ES评分 0

DOI
刊名
Journal of International Psychiatry
年,卷(期) 2018, 45(6)
作者
作者单位

天津市安定医院 ;
天津市安定医院 ;

摘要
【摘要】目的:研究帕罗西汀联合心理干预治疗围绝经期抑郁症及对脑源性神经营养因子(Brain-derived neurotrophic factor,BDNF)表达的影响。方法:将我院2016年4月至2017年4月间收治的88例围绝经期抑郁症患者分为治疗组(44例)及对照组(44例),两组患者均采取激素序贯疗法,对照组在此基础上口服帕罗西汀,观察组在对照组基础上加用护患共同参与的心理干预,治疗前、治疗2周后及治疗4周后测定两组患者血清BDNF水平,记录汉密尔顿抑郁量表(HAMD)评分及围绝经期综合量表(Kupperman)评分,同时根据两组HAMD评分增减情况比较两组临床疗效。结果:干预前24h两组血液BDNF水平差异无统计学意义(P>0.05),干预2周时两组血液BDNF水平均显著高于干预前,同时观察组上述指标水平显著高于对照组,差异具有统计学意义(P<0.05)。干预4周时两组血液BDNF水平均显著高于干预后2周,同时观察组上述指标水平显著高于对照组,差异具有统计学意义(P<0.05);干预后观察组治疗总有效率显著高于对照组,组间差异显著(P=0.01,χ2=5.44)。干预前24h两组HAMD评分差异无统计学意义(P>0.05),干预后2周两组HAMD评分水平均显著低于干预前,同时观察组上述指标水平显著低于对照组,差异具有统计学意义(P<0.05);干预4周时两组HAMD评分均显著低于干预2周时,同时观察组上述指标水平显著低于对照组,差异具有统计学意义(P<0.05);干预前24h两组Kupperman评分差异无统计学意义(P>0.05),预后2周两组Kupperman评分水平均显著低于干预前,同时观察组上述指标水平显著低于对照组,差异具有统计学意义(P<0.05);干预4周时两组Kupperman评分均显著低于干预2周时,同时观察组上述指标水平显著低于对照组,差异具有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论:帕罗西汀联合心理干预治疗围绝经期抑郁症具有良好效果,能明显提高BDNF水平,降低HAMD评分和Kupperman评分。
Abstract
[Abstract] objective:To study the effect of paroxetine combined with psychological intervention in the treatment of peri-menopausal depression and brain-derived neurotrophic factor. Methods:From April 2016 to April 2017, 88 patients with peri-menopausal depression were divided into treatment group (n = 44) and control group (n = 44).The patients in both groups were treated with sequential hormone therapy, the control group took paroxetine orally on this basis, and the observation group was treated with psychological intervention of nursing and patient participation on the basis of the control group.Serum BDNF levels were measured before treatment, 2 weeks after treatment and 4 weeks after treatment.And according to the increase and decrease of HAMD score to compare the clinical efficacy of the two groups.Results:There was no significant difference in blood BDNF levels between the two groups 24 hours before intervention (P > 0.05). At 2 weeks after intervention, the levels of blood BDNF in both groups were significantly higher than those before intervention. The above indexes in the observation group were significantly higher than those in the control group (P < 0.05).The level of blood BDNF in the two groups was significantly higher than that in the control group at 4 weeks after intervention (P < 0.05), and the level of above indexes in the observation group was significantly higher than that in the control group (P < 0.05).The total effective rate in the observation group was significantly higher than that in the control group after intervention, and the difference between the two groups was significant (P =0.01, χ 2 = 5.44).There was no significant difference in HAMD scores between the two groups 24 hours before intervention (P > 0.05). The HAMD scores of the two groups were significantly lower than those before intervention at 2 weeks after intervention. The above indexes in the observation group were significantly lower than those in the control group (P < 0.05).The HAMD score of the two groups was significantly lower than that of the control group at the 4th week of intervention, and the level of the above indexes in the observation group was significantly lower than that in the control group (P < 0.05).There was no significant difference in Kupperman scores between the two groups 24 hours before intervention (P > 0.05). The Kupperman scores of the two groups at 2 weeks after intervention were significantly lower than those before intervention. And the level of above indexes in the observation group was significantly lower than that in the control group, and the difference was statistically significant (P < 0.05). The Kupperman score of the two groups was significantly lower than that of the control group at the 4th week of intervention, and the level of the above indexes in the observation group was significantly lower than that in the control group (P < 0.05).Conclusion:Paroxetine combined with psychological intervention in the treatment of postmenopausal depression has a good effect, can significantly improve the level of BDNF, reduce HAMD score and Kupperman score.
关键词
【关键词】帕罗西汀联合心理干预;围绝经期抑郁症;脑源性神经营养因子
KeyWord
[keywords] paroxetine combined with psychological intervention; peri-menopausal depression; brain-derived neurotrophic factor
基金项目
页码 1044-1046
  • 参考文献
  • 相关文献
  • 引用本文

杨会增*,高昕,张京华, 韩冬昱. 帕罗西汀联合心理干预治疗围绝经期抑郁症及对脑源性神经营养因子表达的影响 [J]. 国际精神病学杂志. 2018; 45; (6). 1044 - 1046.

  • 文献评论

相关学者

相关机构