摘要
目的比较米氮平与丁螺环酮治疗惊恐障碍的疗效及安全性。方法将86例惊恐障碍患者随机分为观察组和对照组各43例,观察组予以米氮平30～60 mg/d,对照组予以丁螺环酮15～30 mg/d。两组疗程均为8周。疗效评定采用Hamilton焦虑量表（HAMA）,安全性评价采用副反应量表（TESS）、实验室检查及体检。结果观察组有效率为90.7%,对照组有效率为83.7%（χ^2=1.17,P〉0.05）;治疗1、2周末,观察组HAMA评分均低于对照组（分别为t=2.94,P〈0.01;t=2.49,P〈0.05）,但治疗4、8周末,两组HAMA评分均无显著性差异（P〉0.05）。两组不良反应程度均较轻微。结论米氮平治疗惊恐障碍起效快,疗效与丁螺环酮相仿。
Objective To compare the efficacy and safety of mirtazapine and buspirone on panic disorder. Methods 86 cases with panic disorder were divided into two groups： the mirtazapine （30-60 mg/d） group and the buspirone （15-30 mg/d） group. Hamilton Anxiety Scale （HAMA） was adopted to evaluate the efficacy. Safety was evaluated with Treatment Emergent Symptom Scale （TESS）, laboratorial and physical examination. Results The effective rate of mirtazapine group and buspirone group was 90. 7% and 83.7% respectively 8 weeks after treatment （χ^2 = 1.17,P〉0.05）. The scores of HAMA of the mirtazapine group decreased more than that of the buspirone group 1 or 2 weeks after treatment （t= 2.94, P〈0.01 and t= 2.49, P〈0.05 respectively）. At the end of wk,But there was not significant difference between two groups 4 or 8 weeks after treatment （P〉0. 05）. Some mild side-effects were observed in both groups. Conclusion Mirtazapine shows a similar effect to buspirone and takes effect earlier on panic disorder.
出处
《中国康复理论与实践》
CSCD
2008年第9期872-873,共2页
Chinese Journal of Rehabilitation Theory and Practice
