作　　者： (唐本玲）; (唐琦）;

机构地区： 江油市精神病医院,四川绵阳621700

出　　处： 《四川精神卫生》 2017年第4期337-340,共4页

摘　　要： 目的探讨文拉法辛缓释片治疗抑郁症伴躯体疼痛障碍的效果及安全性,为临床合理用药提供参考。方法选取2016年2月-2017年3月江油市精神病医院收治的100例抑郁症伴躯体疼痛障碍患者,均符合《中国精神障碍分类与诊断标准(第3版)》(CCMD-3)抑郁症诊断标准,且慢性疼痛等级评价量表(GCP)评分在Ⅰ级以上并有3个月以上的持续性疼痛存在。采用随机数字表法分为观察组和对照组各50例。观察组给予文拉法辛缓释片治疗,对照组给予帕罗西汀治疗,两组均治疗8周。分别于治疗前和治疗第1、2、4、8周末采用汉密尔顿抑郁量表17项版(HAMD-17)、视觉模拟量表(VAS)进行评定,于治疗第1、2、4、8周末采用副反应量表(TESS)评价安全性。结果治疗后,观察组临床治疗总有效率高于对照组,差异有统计学意义(94.00%vs.78.00%,χ~2=5.316,P<0.05);治疗第1、2、4、8周末,观察组HAMD-17和VAS评分均较治疗前低(P均<0.05),治疗第2、4、8周末,对照组HAMD-17和VAS评分均较治疗前低(P均<0.05),治疗后各时点,观察组HAMD-17和VAS评分均低于对照组,差异均有统计学意义(P均<0.05),两组TESS评分比较差异均无统计学意义(P均>0.05)。结论文拉法辛缓释片较帕罗西汀治疗抑郁症伴躯体疼痛障碍的相对效果更好,二者安全性可能相当。 Objective To explore the efficacy and safety of venlafaxine sustained release tablets on the treatment of depression comorbidity somatic pain disorder, and to provide reference for clinical rational use of drugs. Methods 100 patients of depression with somatic pain disorder in the Psychiatric Hospital of Jiangyou from February 2016 to March 2017 were recruited, all patients were in accordance with the Chinese Classification and Diagnostic Criteria of Mental Disease, third edition（ CCMD - 3） diagnostic criteria for depression, the Grading Chronic Pain Severity （GCP） score above I level and the pain lasted more than three months. They were divided into the observation group （n =50） and the control group （n =50） with the random number table method. The observation group was treated with venlafaxine, and the control group was treated with paroxetine. Both groups were treated for 8 weeks. Before and after treatment for 1,2,4 and 8 weeks, the Hamilton Depression Scale 17 - item （ HAMD - 17） and Visual Analog Scale（ VAS） were used to evaluate the clinical efficacy. After treatment for 1,2,4 and 8 weekend, Treatment Emergent Symptom Scale （TESS） was used to evaluate the safety of the two groups. Results After treatment, the clinical treatment efficiency of the observation group was higher than that of the control group, the difference was statistically significant （94.00% vs. 78.00% =5. 316, P〈0.05）. At the 1st,2nd, 4th and 8th weekend after treatment, the HAMD -17 and VAS scores of the observation group were lower than before treatment （P 〈0.05）. At the 2nd, 4th and 8th weekend after treatment, the HAMD -17 and VAS scores of the control group were lower than before treatment （P 〈0. 05） . At different time points after treatment, the HAMD - 17 and VAS scores of the observation group were lower than those of the control group （P 〈0. 05） , and there was no statistically significant difference between the TESS scores of the two groups �

关 键 词： 文拉法辛缓释片 抑郁症 躯体疼痛障碍 疗效 安全性