冠心病伴焦虑、抑郁症状患者实施心理干预的效果评价

目的 评价伴焦虑、抑郁症状的冠心病患者实施心理干预治疗的临床效果.方法 选取120例伴焦虑、抑郁症状的冠心病住院患者,将其随机分为对照组、心理干预组、综合干预组各40例.三组患者均给予冠心病常规治疗.心理干预组在常规治疗基础上接受既定方案的心理干预;综合干预组在常规治疗基础上另给予既定方案的心理干预及抗抑郁药物（黛力新片）治疗.采用焦虑自评量表（SAS）、抑郁自评量表（SDS）分别在患者入院时及干预4周后进行调查,评价其心理疗效,通过患者症状及心电图变化评价其临床疗效.结果 干预前,三组一般情况及SAS和SDS评分差异均无统计学意义（P均＞0.05）.干预4周后,心理干预组和综合干预组患者的SAD和SDS评分差值均较对照组明显升高（P均＜0.01）;综合干预组差值升高更明显（P＜0.01）;综合干预组和心理干预组的临床疗效均优于对照组（x2=26.911,P＜0.01x2=7.500,P＜0.0167）,综合干预组的总有效率高于心理干预组,差异有统计学意义（x2=8.538,P＜0.0167）.结论 对伴焦虑、抑郁症状的冠心病患者在常规内科治疗基础上实施心理干预能有效改善其心身症状,提高临床疗效;且在心理干预基础上加服抗抑郁药物可进一步提高疗效.

Implementation on the effect of psychological intervention on coronary heart disease patients with depression and anxiety symptoms

Objective To evaluate the clinical effect of psychological intervention treatment on coronary heart disease patients associated with anxiety and depression symptoms. Methods 120 cases of coronary heart dis- ease patients with anxiety and depression symptoms in hospital were randomly divided into control group, the psy- chological intervention group, the comprehensive intervention group 40 cases in each. Tree groups of patients were given conventional treatment of coronary heart disease, psychological intervention group were given addition of psy- chological intervention, the comprehensive intervention group on the basis of psychological intervention group given other antidepressant drugs （dai li xin） treatment. The self-evaluation of anxiety scale （SAS）, depression self rating scale （SDS） respectively used to evaluate the curative effect of psychological intervention after 4 weeks, and through the patient＇s symptoms and electrocardiogram （ecg） changes evaluate its clinical efficacy. Results Before the intervention, general situation and SAS and SDS scores in three group were no significant differences （P〉 0.05 ）, 4 weeks after intervention, SAD and SDS score in psychological intervention group and the comprehensive intervention group patients difference than the control group significantly increased（P〈0.01 ）. Comprehensive inter- vention group difference increased more obviously （P〈0.01）, the clinical efficacy of psychological intervention group and comprehensive intervention group were better than the control group （χ2=26.911 ,P〈0.01; χ2=7.500,P〈0.0167 ）, the total effective rate of comprehensive intervention group is higher than the psychological intervention group, the difference was statistically significant （χ2=8.538,P〈0.0167）. Conclusion For associated with anxiety and depression symptoms of patients with coronary artery disease, psychological intervention can effectively improve the psychosomatic symptoms and the clinical curative effect on the basis of