首页 | 本学科首页   官方微博 | 高级检索  
相似文献
 共查询到18条相似文献,搜索用时 140 毫秒
1.
目的 比较心境障碍问卷(MDQ)和 32 项轻躁狂症状清单(HCL-32)在单相抑郁障碍和双相 障碍患者中的应用效果。方法 纳入 2014 年 9 月至 2015 年 12 月于首都医科大学附属北京安定医院就 诊的 212 例心境障碍患者,其中单相抑郁障碍组患者 107 例,双相障碍组患者 105 例。采用主成分分析 法对 2 个量表进行因子分析。采用 Cronbach''s α 系数评估 2 个量表的内部一致性信度,采用 Spearman 相 关分析 2 个量表各条目得分与总分的相关性,比较两组患者 2 个量表的阳性应答率及得分。采用受试者 工作特征(ROC)曲线分析 2 个量表的筛查性能并比较 ROC 曲线下面积。结果 MDQ 为两因子结构,特 征值分别为 5.39、1.47,对总方差的累积贡献率为 52.81%;HCL-32 为三因子结构,特征值分别为 12.61、 2.87、1.84,对总方差的累积贡献率为 54.11%。MDQ 和 HCL-32 的 Cronbach''s α 系数分别为 0.88(95%CI: 0.85~0.90)、0.95(95%CI:0.94~0.96)。MDQ、HCL-32 各条目与总分之间的相关系数分别为 0.50~0.72 (P< 0.01)、0.16~0.78(P< 0.05)。双相障碍组 MDQ 所有条目的阳性应答率均高于单相抑郁障碍组;除 条目 32 外,双相障碍组 HCL-32 各条目的阳性应答率均高于单相抑郁障碍组。单相抑郁障碍组的 MDQ 总分为 3.00(0,5.00)分,HCL-32 总分为 9.00(1.00,17.00)分,低于双相障碍组的 5.00(1.50,9.00)、17.00 (12.00,23.50)分,差异有统计学意义(Z=-4.03、-5.02;P< 0.01)。MDQ 区分单相抑郁障碍和双相障碍的 ROC 曲线下面积为 0.66(95%CI:0.59~0.73,P< 0.001),与 HCL-32 的 0.70(95%CI:0.63~0.77,P< 0.001) 比较,差异无统计学意义(Z=1.07,P=0.28)。MDQ 的最佳划界分为 6 分,灵敏度为 0.48,特异度为 0.82; HCL-32 的最佳划界分为 8 分,灵敏度为 0.85,特异度为 0.47。结论 MDQ 和 HCL-32 在单相抑郁障碍 和双相障碍患者中应用的信度较好,均可适用于专科医院鉴别双相障碍和单相抑郁障碍。HCL-32 较 MDQ 灵敏度高,但特异度低。  相似文献   

2.
目的 分析心境障碍问卷(MDQ)和 32 项轻躁狂症状清单(HCL-32)在精神病专科医院 抑郁症患者中筛查轻躁狂 / 躁狂症状的检出率差异、阴性与阳性患者临床特征的差异。方法 选取 2014 年 9 月至 2015 年 12 月于首都医科大学附属北京安定医院住院或门诊就诊的 105 例抑郁症患者为 研究对象,使用MDQ和HCL-32 调查患者既往轻躁狂/躁狂症状,其中MDQ总分≥ 7 分、HCL-32 总分≥ 14 分为既往轻躁狂 / 躁狂症状阳性,比较 2 个量表的阳性检出率、阳性与阴性患者的临床特征。采用 Cronbach''s α 系数检验量表信度。结果 MDQ 的 Cronbach''s α 系数为 0.784(95%CI:0.718~0.840,P< 0.01),HCL-32 的 Cronbach''s α 系 数 为 0.943(95%CI:0.926~0.958,P< 0.01)。MDQ 筛 查 的 阳 性 率 为 15.24%(16/105),低于 HCL-32 筛查的 40.95%(43/105),差异有统计学意义(P< 0.01)。2 个量表的一致性 较低,差异有统计学意义(Kappa=0.281,P< 0.01)。MDQ 筛查阳性的患者中,伴有自杀观念、企图或行 为者占 7/16,伴不典型抑郁症状者占 6/16,高于阴性患者的 29.21%(26/89)和 13.48%(12/89),差异有统计 学意义(P< 0.05)。结论 HCL-32 对抑郁症患者既往轻躁狂 / 躁狂症状的检出率高于 MDQ,并且筛查阳 性的抑郁症患者的自杀风险高,伴不典型抑郁特征。  相似文献   

3.
目的 应用心境障碍问卷(MDQ)对诊断为抑郁障碍的精神专科住院患者进行双相障碍的筛查,评估MDQ的应用价值.方法 应用MDQ对48例抑郁障碍住院患者进行评定,以美国精神障碍诊断与统计手册第4版轴Ⅰ障碍定式检查-病人研究版( SCID- Ⅰ/P)为标准对患者进行重新诊断,并与MDQ筛查结果进行比较.结果 48例患者中,以MDQ得分≥7分判断为双相障碍者13例(27.1%);SCID- Ⅰ/P诊断为双相障碍者17例(35.4%),其中MDQ得分≥7分者11例.操作特征曲线分析显示,MDQ筛查双相障碍的敏感性为0.647,特异性为0.935.结论 住院诊断为抑郁障碍的患者中未被识别的双相障碍比例较高,采用MDQ有助于从抑郁障碍中筛查出双相障碍.  相似文献   

4.
目的:比较33项轻躁狂症状清单(HCL-33)和心境障碍问卷(MDQ)在老年单相抑郁(MDD)和双相抑郁(BD)鉴别中的应用价值。方法:采取成组设计的方法,纳入符合美国《精神障碍诊断与统计手册》第4版(DSM-Ⅳ)的MDD(108例)和BD(107例)诊断标准的患者。以DSM-IV的诊断为金标准,采用ROC曲线进行分析,确定HCL-33和MDQ区分MDD和BD,MDD和BD-I,MDD和BD-II以及BD-I和BD-II的最佳划界分,分别计算灵敏度和特异度。采用Medcalc软件对ROC曲线进行比较,分析这两种工具的诊断价值是否存在差异。结果:ROC曲线结果显示HCL-33区分MDD和BD的ROC曲线下面积(AUC)为0.909(95%CI:0.870~0.948,P<0.001),最佳划界分为14分,灵敏度为88.8%,特异度82.4%;MDQ区分MDD和BD的AUC为0.926(95%CI:0.883~0.957,P<0.001),最佳划界分为7分,灵敏度86.0%,特异度为88.9%。采用Medcalc软件对ROC曲线进行比较,结果显示HCL-33和MDQ在老年人群中...  相似文献   

5.
目的 通过轻躁狂检测清单(HCL-32)测评结果甄别抑郁症中可能存在的双相障碍.方法 对128例抑郁症患者应用软双相建议性诊断标准进行诊断,并比较软双相与非软双相抑郁症患者HCL-32的差异.结果 (1)128例抑郁症患者中,HCL-32评分0~19(5.7±4.7)分;(2)是否软双相抑郁者分别为15例和113例,HCL-32评分分别为[(9.4±6.7)分vs(5.2±4.2)分,t=3.40,P=0.001],是否宽松软双相抑郁者HCL-32评分分别为[(7.8±5.6)分vs(4.3±3.4)分,t=4.34,P=0.000],有无双相障碍家族史者HCL-32评分分别为[(9.2±6.8)分vs(5.4±4.4)分,t=2.39,P=0.018],有无躁狂转相史者HCL-32评分分别为[(8.6±7.3)分vs(5.3±4.3)分,t=2.05,P=0.043],有无环性人格或明显外向者HCL-32评分分别为[(8.4±5.7)分vs(5.3±4.4)分,t=2.58,P=0.011],有无旺盛性人格素质者HCL-32评分分别为[(9.0±6.7)分vs(5.0±3.9)分,t=3.90,P=0.000],有无边缘性人格者HCL-32评分分别为[(8.6±4.3)分vs(5.4±4.7)分,t=2.22,P=0.028],是否呈发作性病程者HCL-32评分分别为[(8.9±5.7)分vs(5.2±4.3)分,t=3.19,P=0.002];(3)男女患者HCL-32评分分别为[(4.3±3.7)分vs(6.6±5.1)分,t=2.87,P=0.005];(4)有抑郁症家族史者、有自杀家族史者、发病年龄≤25岁者、有非典型抑郁者、有精神运动抑制者、有精神病性抑郁者、有生物节律明显者HCL-32评分与对应组的差异无统计学意义;(5)HCL-32>7分37例(28.9%),>10分17例(13.3%),>14分7例(5.5%),其中>10分者所占比例与软双相所占比例接近.结论 HCL-32>10分可能有助于在抑郁症患者中筛选诊断双相障碍.  相似文献   

6.
目的研究中文版心境障碍问卷(MDQ)在双相Ⅱ型障碍患者中的信度、效度等方面的应用效果。方法使用中文版MDQ对56例双相Ⅱ型障碍患者测评,其中22例患者(39.28%)在8~14d重测。结果经相关分析及Kruskal--Wallis检验,双相Ⅱ型障碍患者在接受测评时的心境状态对MDQ得分的影响无显著性意义(P值分别为0.31、0.49)。因子分析显示特征值〉1的因子有4个,特征值分别为2.85、1.82、1.63、1.58,4个因子对总方差的累积贡献率为60.6%。内部因子一致性分析MDQ全量表的Cronbach’s alpha值为0.72。MDQ重测相关系数为0.66,有显著性意义。两次测评中,MDQ中13项条目应答一致率为47.1%~88.2%。患者的MDQ得分范围为0~12分,有27例患者的MDQ得分≥7分(48.21%)。13项条目阳性回答率为23.5%~74.5%。结论中文版MDQ经在双相Ⅱ型患者中初步测试,其信度、效度基本满足心理测量学要求,可在中国患者中应用。  相似文献   

7.
目的:研究中文版32项轻躁狂症状清单(32-item hypomania checklist,HCL-32)在双相Ⅱ型障碍患者中应用的效度、信度。方法:对69例双相Ⅱ型障碍患者应用HCL-32进行测评,其中有26例(37.7%)患者在8~14d后重测。结果:经相关分析及Kruskal-Wallis检验,双相Ⅱ型障碍患者在接受测评时的心境状态对HCL-32得分的影响无统计学意义(P分别为0.48、0.23)。因子分析显示前2个因子的特征值较佳,分别为6.19和3.57,前2个因子对总方差的累积贡献率为30.5%。内部一致性信度分析HCL-32全量表Cronbach'salpha值为0.84,因子Ⅰ和因子Ⅱ分别为0.85和0.66。全量表重测相关系数为0.51(P=0.007)。前后两次测评中,32项条目重测一致率为53.8%~96.2%。患者的HCL-32得分范围为3~26分,HCL-32总分≥14的患者有46例(66.7%)。量表分均值为(15.26±5.91)分。32项条目阳性回答率为7.2%~82.6%。结论:HCL-32中文版在双相Ⅱ型障碍患者中初步试用,其效度、内部一致性信度尚满意,但重测信度偏低。  相似文献   

8.
目的:了解32项轻躁狂症状清单(HCL-32)划界分值高低人群的临床特征。方法:对1726例精神科门诊和住院部连续就诊的抑郁障碍患者采用HCL-32、简明国际神经精神访谈(MINI)进行评估。根据HCL-32得分结果,将患者分为HCL-32≥14且MINI单/双相、10≤HCL-32<14且MINI单/双相和HCL-32<10且MINI单相共5组,进行临床特征的分析。结果:有效完成问卷评分1487例,MINI诊断为双相障碍者360例(24.2%),以HCL-32≥14为划界值诊断为双相障碍者532例(35.8%),两种诊断方法差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。各组间在性别、文化程度、婚姻状况、工作状况、首次发病年龄上差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05);10≤HCL-32<14且MINI单相组和HCL-32<10且MINI单相组在年龄、性别、婚姻状况、首次发病年龄上差异无统计学意义。HCL-32阳性回答条目数从高到低依次为HCL-32≥14且MINI双/单相组、10≤HCL-32<14且MINI双/单相组、HCL-32<10且MINI单相组。HCL-32≥14且MINI单/双相组抑郁发作更频繁、伴有更多的不典型特征、自杀观念行为、精神病性症状和具有周期性/季节性特点,有更多阳性家族史、既往曾被诊断过双相、目前更多使用抗抑郁剂以及情感"高涨"状态持续时间长于HCL-32<10且MINI单相组。结论:HCL-32≥14且MINI单/双相患者较HCL-32<10且MINI单相患者具有更多的临床特征,双相障碍的可能性更大。  相似文献   

9.
目的 了解双重抑郁症与抑郁症患者的临床特征.方法 采用随机多级抽样方法,以美国精神障碍诊断与统计手册第4版-修订版( DSM-Ⅳ-TR)为诊断标准,以DSM-Ⅳ-TR轴Ⅰ障碍定式临床检查患者版为诊断工具,以河北省流行病学调查的399例抑郁症患者为研究对象,其中符合双重抑郁症诊断标准患者56例(双重抑郁症组),符合抑郁症诊断标准患者343例(单一抑郁症组);采用功能大体评定量表( GAF)评定患者的功能状况.结果 399例抑郁症患者中,双重抑郁症的检出率为14.04%.单一抑郁症组和双重抑郁症组均有较高的其他精神障碍的共病率,分别为39.94%和48.21%,2组比较差异无统计学意义(x2=1.361,P>0.05);均以共病未特定的焦虑障碍、特殊恐怖症、广泛性焦虑障碍、创伤后应激障碍、惊恐障碍、酒依赖/酒滥用等常见.双重抑郁症组患者精神运动性激越、优柔寡断、自杀未遂症状出现的频率均高于单一抑郁症组(P<0.05),2组均以忧郁特征为常见临床特征(>50%).2组GAF评分和疾病的严重程度比较差异无统计学意义(t=0.354,P>0.05;x2 =0.655,P>0.05).结论 抑郁症中双重抑郁症的比例不低,共病其他精神障碍均较常见,但双重抑郁症患者自杀的风险更高,做事情总是优柔寡断.  相似文献   

10.
目的:调查重性抑郁障碍(MDD)和双相障碍患者(BD)精神科共病情况。方法:采用横断面调查方法,对2011年3月至8月符合美国精神障碍诊断与统计手册第4版(DSM-Ⅳ)诊断标准的141例重性抑郁障碍和52例双相障碍患者进行一般情况问卷及国际神经精神科简式访谈问卷(MINI)调查。结果:重性抑郁障碍组和双相障碍组精神科共病率分别为30.0%和28.8%,两组共病率差异无统计学意义(χ2=0.016,P>0.05);两组共病焦虑障碍最为常见,其共病率分别为27.0%和15.4%,差异无统计学意义(χ2=2.799,P=0.094);共病酒精依赖或物质滥用差异有统计学意义(χ2=6.405,P=0.011)。结论:重性抑郁障碍和双相障碍与其他精神科疾病存在广泛共病,尤以焦虑障碍多见。  相似文献   

11.
Bipolar disorder is prone to being overlooked because its diagnosis is more often based on retrospective report than cross-sectional assessment. Recommendations for improving the detection of bipolar disorder include the use of screening questionnaires. The Mood Disorder Questionnaire (MDQ) is the most widely studied self-report screening scale that has been developed to improve the detection of bipolar disorder. Although developed as a screening scale, the MDQ has also been used as a case-finding measure. However, studies of the MDQ in psychiatric patients have found high false positive rates, though no study has determined the psychiatric diagnoses associated with false positive results on the MDQ. The goal of the present report from the Rhode Island Methods to Improve Diagnostic Assessment and Services (MIDAS) project was to identify the psychiatric disorders associated with increased false positive rates on the MDQ. Four hundred eighty psychiatric outpatients were interviewed with the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV (SCID) and completed the MDQ. After excluding the 52 patients diagnosed with a lifetime history of bipolar disorder we compared diagnostic frequencies in patients who did and did not screen positive on the MDQ. Based on the Hirschfeld et al. scoring guidelines of the MDQ, 15.2% (n = 65) of the 428 nonbipolar patients screened positive on MDQ. Compared to patients who screened negative, the patients who screened positive were significantly more likely have a current and lifetime diagnosis of specific phobia, posttraumatic stress disorder, alcohol and drug use disorders, any eating disorder, any impulse control disorder, and attention deficit disorder. Results were similar using a less restrictive threshold to identify MDQ cases. That is, MDQ caseness was associated with significantly elevated rates of anxiety, impulse control, substance use, and attention deficit disorders. Studies using the MDQ as a stand-alone proxy for the diagnosis of bipolar disorder should consider whether the presence of these other forms of psychopathology could be responsible for differences between individuals who screen positive and negative on the scale.  相似文献   

12.
OBJECTIVE: This study assessed the operating characteristics of the mood disorder questionnaire (MDQ) among offenders arrested and detained at a county jail. METHOD: The MDQ, a brief self-report instrument designed to screen for all subtypes of bipolar disorder (BP I, II and NOS) was voluntarily administered to adult detainees at the Ottawa County Jail in Port Clinton, Ohio. A confirmatory diagnostic evaluation was also performed using the mini-international neuropsychiatric interview (MINI). The MDQ was scored using a standard algorithm requiring endorsement of 7/13 mood items as well as two items that assess whether manic or hypomanic symptoms co-occur and cause moderate to severe functional impairment. In addition to the standard algorithm for scoring the MDQ, modifications were also tested in an attempt to improve overall sensitivity. RESULTS: Among 526 jail detainees who completed the MDQ, 37 (7%) screened positive for bipolar disorder. Of 164 detainees who agreed to a research diagnostic evaluation, 32 (19.5%) screened positive on the MDQ, while 55 (33.5%) met criteria for bipolar disorder according to the MINI. When administered to the sample of 164 adult jail detainees, the sensitivity of the MDQ was 0.47 and the specificity was 0.94. The MDQ was significantly better at detecting BP I (0.59) than BP II/NOS (0.19; p=0.008). Modification of scoring the MDQ improved the sensitivity for detection of BP II from 0.23 to 0.54 with minimal decrease in specificity (0.84). The optimum sensitivity and specificity of the MDQ was achieved by decreasing the item threshold to 3/13 and eliminating the symptom co-occurrence and functional impairment items. CONCLUSION: The MDQ was found to have limited utility as a screening tool for bipolar disorder in a correctional setting, particularly for the BP II subtype.  相似文献   

13.
Objectives:  The Mood Disorders Questionnaire (MDQ) has been the most widely studied screening questionnaire for bipolar disorder, though few studies have examined its performance in a heterogeneous sample of psychiatric outpatients. In the present report from the Rhode Island Methods to Improve Diagnostic Assessment and Services (MIDAS) project, we examined the operating characteristics of the MDQ in a large sample of psychiatric outpatients presenting for treatment.
Methods:  A total of 534 psychiatric outpatients were interviewed with the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV and asked to complete the MDQ. Missing data on the MDQ reduced the number of patients to 480, 10.4% (n = 52) of whom were diagnosed with bipolar disorder.
Results:  Based on the scoring guidelines recommended by the developers of the MDQ, the sensitivity of the scale was only 63.5% for the entire group of bipolar patients. The specificity of the scale was 84.8%, and the positive and negative predictive values were 33.7% and 95.0%, respectively. When impairment was not required to define a case on the MDQ, then sensitivity increased to 75.0%, specificity dropped to 78.5%, positive predictive value was 29.8%, and negative predictive value was 96.3%.
Conclusions:  In a large sample of psychiatric outpatients, we found that the MDQ, when scored according to the developers' recommendations, had inadequate sensitivity as a screening measure. After the threshold to determine MDQ caseness was lowered by not requiring moderate or severe impairment, the sensitivity of the scale increased, but specificity decreased, and positive predictive value remained below 30%. These results raise questions regarding the MDQ's utility in routine clinical practice.  相似文献   

14.
Objective: The Mood Disorder Questionnaire (MDQ) is an instrument for the detection of patients with bipolar disorder (BD). The original English version is validated in both the psychiatric and the general population, but a validated Spanish version is not yet available. Psychometric properties of the Spanish adaptation of the MDQ in psychiatry are described. Methods: The MDQ is a self‐administered questionnaire comprising a list of 13 hypomanic symptoms and two questions about concurrence of symptoms and functional impairment caused by the symptoms. We selected patients from 15 psychiatric outpatient departments, diagnosed with BD type I and II (BDI and BDII) and major depression (MD) according to DSM‐IV‐TR criteria (concurrent validity instrument). A control group of healthy subjects (HS) was selected. The patient‐selection criteria included stability of the disorder and pharmacological treatment. The MDQ was administered to 236 subjects, distributed among the four groups, on two occasions, four weeks apart. We analysed the internal consistency, test–retest reliability, and discriminative capacity of the MDQ for the detection of patients with BD. Results: Concurrent validity based on diagnosis according to DSM‐IV‐TR was 0.83. The internal consistency, evaluated by Cronbach’s α, was 0.90. The mean (SD) number of affirmative responses by group was: 9.8 (2.4) for BDI, 8.5 (2.8) for BDII, 2.7 (2.2) for MD, and 1.02 (1.9) for HS. Statistically significant differences between all the groups were found (Kruskal–Wallis test, p < 0.001). Concurrent validity using the diagnostic variable was 0.83. Test–retest reliability was 0.92. We analysed the scale’s discriminative capacity, revealing a sensitivity value of 0.60 [95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.51–0.69] and a specificity value of 0.98 (95% CI = 0.94–0.99) in the detection of BD. The positive and negative probability ratios were 35.5 and 2.4, respectively. If we consider only seven positive responses as the discriminative criterion, sensitivity increases to 0.81 (95% CI = 0.73–0.88), the specificity value is 0.95 (95% CI = 0.89–0.98) and the positive and negative probability quotients are 16 and 5.3. Conclusions: The psychometric characteristics of the Spanish version are similar to those of the original version. In the Spanish adaptation of the MDQ, seven positive responses to hypomanic symptoms show a good discriminative capacity for BD in patients attending psychiatric outpatient facilities; therefore, this cut‐off score is proposed for the detection of BD in psychiatric outpatients.  相似文献   

15.
Abstract

Objective. Comorbid mental illness amongst methadone maintenance therapy clients may be common and screening may be warranted. The Mood Disorders Questionnaire (MDQ) is a screening tool for bipolar disorder that has been validated in other treatment settings. Its utility for patients with substance use disorders is assessed in this study. Methods. Clients of a methadone maintenance program were invited to complete the MDQ when they attended a public Drug and Alcohol Service for their regular scheduled appointments. Information about their history of substance use was also collected. Results. Eighty clients (43 females, 37 males) aged 35 ± 8.0 years (mean ± SD) participated in the study. Seventy-four clients completed the MDQ of which 36 (48.6%) obtained a positive screen. A check of client files suggested that only three of the 74 participants had a current working diagnosis of bipolar disorder. These three participants had screened positive on the MDQ. Conclusions. There was a high prevalence of manic symptoms reported by participants, suggesting that screening for bipolar disorder in this population may be warranted. However, there is a risk of false positives with the MDQ, as it does not clearly differentiate between symptoms of mania and drug intoxication.  相似文献   

16.
了解2010年某部新兵的一般健康状况。方法应用一般健康问卷(GHQ)对205名某部新兵进行测试。结果新兵的疑似阳性个体检出率(29.27%)高于一般市民群体(19.52%),其差异具有统计学意义(χ2=12.31,P=0.0005);女新兵的阳性检出率(48.64%)显著高于男新兵(25.00%),差异具有统计学意义(χ2=8.19,P=0.004);不同文化程度新兵的阳性检出率其差异有统计学意义(χ2=17.66,P=0.0001),其中大专以上文化新兵的阳性检出率(50%)显著高于高中(19.05%,χ2=16.67,P=0.000);GHQ-28A因子分值在不同文化程度群体间其差异有统计学意义(F=4.41,P=0.02),且大专以上新兵群体A因子分值大于初中文化(P=0.005)。结论新兵的一般健康状况不容乐观,有必要进一步的观察和研究。  相似文献   

17.
目的比较不同抗抑郁剂在双相抑郁治疗过程中转相率的差异。方法对150例接受抗抑郁剂治疗的双相抑郁患者出现躁狂、轻躁狂、快速循环情况进行调查,并比较不同抗抑郁剂之间的差异。结果150例双相抑郁中,共有41例患者在治疗过程中转相,总发生率(转相率)34%。其中使用双重作用抗抑郁剂(DAA)患者的转相率为29.2%,使用选择性5-羟色胺回吸收抑制剂〈SSRI)的患者为12.7%,DAA与SSRI联合应用者为48.7%,三组间差异有统计学意义(Χ^2=11.87,P〈0.001)。DDA与SSRI联合应用者转相率高于SSRI,差异有统计学意义(Χ^2=16.06,P〈0.001,危险比OR=6.53);DAA转相率高于SSRI。差异有统计学意义(Χ^2=4.65,P〈0.01,OR=6.53);DAA与SSRI联合应用者转相率高于DAA(Χ^2=3.49,P〉0.05,OR=2.31)。转相与未转相者相比,心境稳定剂的应用差异有统计学意义(7/41,52/109,Χ^2=11.72,P〈0.001)。结论不同类型抗抑郁荆在双相抑郁治疗中引起的转相率有差异,其中联合使用抗抑郁剂的转相率最高,而心境稳定剂的联合应用有助于预防转相。  相似文献   

18.
目的 探讨老年人感觉器官功能缺陷与认知功能损害的关系。方法 采用横断面随机整群分层抽样方法调查≥60岁河北省社区老年人,通过面对面的访谈获取一般人口学资料,并评估感觉器官缺陷状况包括视觉、听觉、味觉、嗅觉功能;同时采用简易精神状态检查量表(MMSE)和蒙特利尔认知评估量表(MoCA)进行认知功能评定。结果 (1)调查3075名老年人,有感觉器官缺陷者共1223名(39.8%)。(2)感觉器官缺陷组MMSE总分和MoCA总分为(25.52±4.32),(22.03±5.49)分低于无感觉器官缺陷组(26.41±3.86),(23.17±5.04)分,差异有统计学意义(t分别为5.84,5.84,P〈0.01);(3)感觉器官缺陷被试者中检出认知功能损害者26.5%高于无感觉器官缺陷者18.8%,患白内障/眼底病变者中认知功能障碍检出率为24.6%高于未患白内障/眼底病变者20.5%,听力障碍者中认知功能障碍检出率为31.5%高于无听力障碍者19.1%,存在嗅觉障碍者中认知功能障碍检出率为19.1%低于未患嗅觉障碍者21.8%,存在味觉障碍者中认知功能障碍检出率为27.6%高于未惠味觉障碍者21.7%,差异均有统计学意义(X^2分别为25.58,13.47,55.08,7.82,9.96;P〈0.05);老视者中认知功能障碍检出率为21.7%,非老视者为22.2%,差异无统计学意义(X^2=0.09,P=0.954)。(4)以认知功能障碍为因变量,各个感觉器官缺陷为自变量进行Logistic回归分析:白内障/眼底病变(Wald=8.85,P=0.003,RR=1.09,95%CT:1.03~1.16)和听力障碍(Wald=7.52,P=0.006,RR=1.19,95%CI:1.05~1.34)是认知功能的影响因素。结论 存在感觉器官缺陷的老年人认知功能水平低于无感觉缺陷的老年人,其中视觉和听觉障碍是认知功能损害的高危因素。  相似文献   

设为首页 | 免责声明 | 关于勤云 | 加入收藏

Copyright©北京勤云科技发展有限公司  京ICP备09084417号