奎硫平对老年精神分裂症患者生活质量的影响

目的：观察奎硫平、利培酮对老年精神分裂症患者生活质量及社会功能的影响。方法：将64例老年精神分裂症患者随机分为奎硫平治疗组和利培酮治疗组,疗程6个月。采用阳性与阴性症状量表（PANSS）评定疗效,生活质量综合评定问卷（GQOLI）评定生活质量,社会功能缺陷量表（SDSS）评定社会功能缺陷和治疗中出现的症状量表（TESS）评价不良反应。结果：治疗后两组PANSS评分有明显下降（P〈0.01）,两组间比较差异无统计学意义（P〉0.05）。奎硫平组GQOLI评分和SDSS某些因子评分较利培酮组显著为好（P〈0.01）;不良反应明显少于利培酮组（P〈0.01）。结论：奎硫平较利培酮治疗老年精神分裂症患者疗效相仿,但更能提高生活质量及社会功能。     

奎硫平与利培酮治疗门诊精神分裂症患者对照研究

目的：探讨奎硫平治疗精神分裂症的疗效及不良反应。方法：50例精神分裂症患者随机分为两组,分别给予奎硫平与利培酮治疗。疗程5周。采用阳性与阴性症状量表(PANSS)、副反应量表(TESS)评定疗效及不良反应。结果：奎硫平组显效率70．0％;利培酮组显效率73．3％。利培酮组锥体外系反应稍高于奎硫平组。结论：奎硫平与利培酮治疗精神分裂症具有相仿疗效。     

奎硫平与利培酮治疗老年期精神分裂症的对照研究

目的　比较奎硫平与利培酮治疗老年期精神分裂症的临床疗效与安全性。方法　将68 例住院老年期精神分裂症患者,随机分成两组,分别给予奎硫平与利培酮治疗,疗程8 周。采用阳性症状量表和阴性症状量表(PANSS)评定疗效,用副反应量表(TESS)评定不良反应。结果　治疗8 周后PANSS总分较治疗前显著下降奎硫平组有效率91.2%,显效率为76.5%,利培酮组分别为88.2%和73.5%,两组比较差异无显著性(P>0.05)。奎硫平组不良反应少而轻。结论　奎硫平与利培酮治疗老年期精神分裂症患者疗效相当,奎硫平不良反应较轻,安全性好。     

奎硫平与利培酮治疗首发精神分裂症的对照研究

目的 :比较奎硫平和利培酮治疗首发精神分裂症的临床疗效与安全性。方法 :对 6 0例首发住院的女性精神分裂症患者 ,随机分为两组 ,分别用奎硫平和利培酮进行 8周治疗。采用阳性症状与阴性症状量表 (PANSS)评定疗效 ,用副反应量表 (TESS)评定不良反应。　结果 :2种药物对首发精神分裂症的疗效相当。两组患者在嗜睡 ,锥体外系症状及月经功能紊乱方面的不良反应差异有显著性 (P <0 .0 5 )。　结论 :奎硫平、利培酮对精神分裂症疗效相似 ,不良反应均较轻。     

奎硫平与利培酮治疗晚发精神分裂症对照研究

目的:比较奎硫平与利培酮治疗晚发精神分裂症患者的临床疗效和安全性。方法:对60例晚发精神分裂症的住院患者随机分为两组,分别用奎硫平和利培酮治疗8周。采用阳性与阴性症状量表(PANSS)评定疗效,用副反应量表(TESS)评定不良反应。结果:奎硫平与利培酮治疗晚发精神分裂症患者的临床疗效差异无显著性。两组不良反应均少而轻。结论:奎硫平治疗晚发精神分裂症疗效好,起效快,不良反应少。     

奎硫平与利培酮对精神分裂症患者生活质量的影响对照研究

目的：比较奎硫平与利培酮对精神分裂症患者生活质量的影响。方法：80例精神分裂症患者随机平分为两组各40例，分别给予奎硫平和利培酮治疗。疗程8周。用生活质量综合评定问卷-74（GQOLI-74）、阳性与阴性症状量表（PANSS）以及治疗中出现的症状量表（TESS）评定疗效及不良反应。结果：奎硫平与利培酮在提高患者生活质量上无显著性差异。结论：奎硫平与利培酮均能显著提高精神分裂症患者生活质量。     

奎硫平与利培酮治疗精神分裂症对照研究

目的：评价奎硫平与利培酮治疗精神分裂症阴性症状的临床疗效与安全性。方法：对64例首次住院的以阴性症状为主的精神分裂症患者，随机分为两组，分别选用奎硫平或利培酮进行8周治疗，采用阳性症状与阴性症状量表(PANSS)评定疗效，用副反应量表(TESS)评定不良反应。结果：两药对精神分裂症阴性症状疗效相当，不良反应发生率及严重程度均相仿。结论：奎硫平与利培酮对精神分裂症阴性症状均有肯定的疗效，且安全性较高。     

奎硫平与利培酮治疗精神分裂症对照研究

目的：探讨奎硫平治疗精神分裂症的疗效及安全性。方法：将64例精神分裂症患者随机分为两组,分别给予奎硫平与利培酮治疗,疗程8周。采用阳性与阴性症状量表（PANSS）及副反应量表（TESS）评定疗效及不良反应。结果：奎硫平与利培酮两药疗效相仿,奎硫平不良反应少而轻微,锥体外系反应少。结论：奎硫平治疗精神分裂症疗效确切,不良反应少。     

利培酮与奎硫平治疗老年精神分裂症的疗效比较

目的比较利培酮与奎硫平治疗老年精神分裂症的疗效。方法63例老年精神分裂症患者分为2组,分别给予利培酮与奎硫平治疗,疗程8周。比较2组的疗效与不良反应。结果2组疗效相当(P>0.05),但奎硫平的不良反应明显少于利培酮(P<0.05)。结论奎硫平与利培酮治疗老年精神分裂症的疗效相当,奎硫平的不良反应较利培酮少。     

奎硫平对精神分裂症患者生活质量研究

目的:探讨奎硫平、舒必利对精神分裂症患者生活质量的影响.方法:对70例精神分裂症患者随机分为两组,分别给予奎硫平、舒必利治疗6个月.用阳性症状与阴性症状量表(PANSS)评定精神症状,用世界卫生组织编制的生活质量量表(WHO QOL-100)评定生活质量.结果:治疗6个月后,奎硫平对精神分裂症阳性症状、阴性症状的改善和舒必利相似,PANSS两组间评分差异无显著性.奎硫平组WHO QOL-100各领域除精神支柱外均明显改善,在生活领域、心理领域、独立性领域、社会关系领域较舒必利组有显著改善.结论:奎硫平组患者生活质量优于舒必利组.     

利培酮合并壮阳胶囊治疗对慢性精神分裂症患者认知功能及社会功能的影响

目的 探讨利培酮合并壮阳胶囊治疗对慢性精神分裂症患者认知功能、精神症状及社会功能的影响.方法 将200例符合美国精神障碍诊断与统计手册第4版诊断标准的慢性精神分裂症患者随机分为利培酮联合壮阳胶囊(研究组,100例)和联合安慰剂(对照组,100例)两组,观察时间均为8周.阳性症状量表(SAPS)、阴性症状量表(SANS)、威斯康星卡片分类测验(WCST)及社会功能缺陷量表(SDSS)作为疗效评价工具.结果 治疗第8周末,两组SAPS、SANS及SDSS评分均较基线降低,WCST指标中除研究组持续应答数外均获改善,差异均有统计学意义(P均<0.01);研究组SAPS、SANS评分的降低较对照组更为明显.与基线比较,研究组WCST分类数较基线增加-1.2±1.9,对照组增加-0.7±1.4;研究组正确应答数增加-10.5±16.3,对照组增加-5.3±16.9;研究组错误应答数降低15.3±25.9,对照组降低7.2±23.7;研究组概念化水平百分数增加-15.1±23.0,对照组增加-9.5±26.7.研究组SDSS评分较基线降低(6.3±4.5)分,对照组降低(4.9±3.9)分.组间上述各项比较,差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05或<0.01).结论 利培酮联合壮阳胶囊比单用利培酮治疗对慢性精神分裂症患者的认知功能、精神症状及社会功能的改善更为有效.     

A randomized, flexible-dose, quasi-naturalistic comparison of quetiapine, risperidone, and olanzapine in the short-term treatment of schizophrenia: the QUERISOLA trial

This was a randomized, flexible-dose, rater-blind, parallel-group, quasi-naturalistic trial comparing the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of quetiapine, risperidone, and olanzapine in patients with schizophrenia hospitalized for severe psychotic symptoms. Seventy-five patients were randomized to quetiapine (n=25), risperidone (n=25), or olanzapine (n=25). Mean doses at Week 8 were: 590.0 mg/day quetiapine; 5.1 mg/day risperidone; 15.1 mg/day olanzapine. Four quetiapine, five risperidone, and five olanzapine patients discontinued prior to Week 8. There were no significant differences between groups in the primary efficacy measures of improvement from baseline in Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) total score at Week 8 in the per protocol (PP) population and the number of completers who experienced >or=40% improvement on the same scale. PP and intent-to-treat analyses showed significant improvement from baseline in each component of a PANSS-derived battery, without significant differences between treatments. No quetiapine patients, one risperidone, and four olanzapine patients reported an adverse event (AE) of moderate intensity; no severe AEs were reported. A linear mixed model for repeated measures showed an effect of treatment on body weight, with significant differences favoring quetiapine over risperidone and olanzapine. Simpson-Angus Scale scores were significantly worse with risperidone compared with both olanzapine and quetiapine at Week 3 and compared with quetiapine thereafter. Use of concomitant medications for anxiety or tension was significantly less frequent with quetiapine. In conclusion, quetiapine, risperidone, and olanzapine have similar efficacy in schizophrenia, but there are drug-specific differences for some AEs and in the use of concomitant medication that differentiate these agents.     

Comparison of quetiapine and risperidone in the treatment of schizophrenia: A randomized, double-blind, flexible-dose, 8-week study

OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy and tolerability of quetiapine and risperidone in the treatment of schizophrenia. METHOD: In this 8-week, double-blind, multicenter, flexible-dose study, patients with schizophrenia (DSM-IV diagnosis) were randomly assigned to quetiapine (200-800 mg/day) or risperidone (2-8 mg/day). The primary hypothesis was that quetiapine was not inferior to risperidone. The primary efficacy measure was change from baseline in Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) total scores; secondary outcomes included response rate (> or = 40% reduction in PANSS scores), Clinical Global Impression-Change (CGI-C), and cognitive and social functioning. Tolerability assessments included treatment-emergent adverse events and changes in weight, glucose, and prolactin. Patients were recruited from June 2001 to September 2002. RESULTS: Patients (N = 673) were randomly assigned to quetiapine (N = 338, mean dose = 525 mg/day) or risperidone (N = 335, mean dose = 5.2 mg/day). The primary analysis demonstrated noninferiority between treatments (p < .05). Improvements with both treatments were comparable on PANSS total, negative, and general psychopathology subscales. Risperidone-treated patients had a significantly (p = .03) greater improvement in PANSS positive subscale score among all patients, but not among completers. Improvements in PANSS response rates, CGI-C, and cognitive function were similar between treatment groups. Changes in serum glucose and weight were minimal and comparable. The rate of extrapyramidal symptom (EPS)-related adverse events was significantly higher with risperidone (22%) than quetiapine (13%; p < .01). Somnolence was more common with quetiapine (26%) than risperidone (20%; p = .04). Prolactin levels increased with risperidone (+35.5 ng/mL), but decreased with quetiapine (-11.5 ng/mL; p < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Quetiapine and risperidone had broadly comparable clinical efficacy. Both agents improved cognitive and social functioning, and neither had a clinically significant effect on weight or glucose. Somnolence was more common with quetiapine; EPS and elevated prolactin rates were significantly higher with risperidone.     

利培酮对精神分裂症患者社会功能的研究

目的:比较利培酮与氯氮平治疗的精神分裂症患者出院后社会功能状况,方法:随机抽取30例服用利培酮,30例服用氯氮平的精神分裂症患者,用阳性症状和阴性症状量表(PANSS), 明精神病评定量表(BPRS),不良反应症状量表(TESS)评定.出院后半年用社会功能缺陷量表(SDSS)评定,并与某些因素进行相关分析及多元逐步回归分析.结果:半年随访发现,服用利培酮的精神分裂症患者在职业工作,婚姻职能,父母职能和社会退缩等社会功能方面明显好于氯氮平,多元逐步回归分析显示,影响社会功能的因素为经济损失多,男性,不能积极参加组织活动,不能与他人和睦相处,BPRS评分高者社会功能差,服用氯氮平的比利培酮差.结论:利培酮和氯氮平相比,治疗的优势主要不在于副反应方面,而在于能较好地改善社会功能.     

A double-blind comparison of risperidone, quetiapine and placebo in patients with schizophrenia experiencing an acute exacerbation requiring hospitalization

OBJECTIVE: This study compared the effects of atypical antipsychotics (risperidone or quetiapine) with placebo and with each other in recently exacerbated patients with schizophrenia requiring hospitalization. METHODS: This international, randomized, double-blind study included a 2-week monotherapy phase followed by a 4-week additive therapy phase. Recently exacerbated patients with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder (DSM-IV) were randomized (2:2:1) to risperidone (n = 153), quetiapine (n = 156), or placebo (n = 73). Target doses were 4 or 6 mg/day of risperidone and 400 or 600 mg/day of quetiapine by day 5, with the ability to increase to 600 or 800 mg/day of quetiapine on day 8. The main outcome measures were the total Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) and need for additional psychotropic medications. RESULTS: Monotherapy Phase: The combined atypical antipsychotic group (n = 308) reached borderline superiority to placebo (n = 71) at the 2-week endpoint on mean change in total PANSS score (-24.1 +/- 1.2 and -20.2 +/- 2.0, respectively; p = 0.067). The change in the atypical group was driven by the improvement with risperidone (-27.7 +/- 1.5 vs. -20.2 +/- 2.0 with placebo, p < 0.01; and vs. -20.5 +/- 1.5 with quetiapine, p < 0.01); the improvement with quetiapine was similar to placebo, p = 0.879. Results were similar on other efficacy endpoints. Additive Therapy Phase: Additional psychotropics were prescribed to fewer (p < 0.01) risperidone (36%) than quetiapine (53%) or placebo patients (59%). The overall discontinuation rate was 18%, 26%, and 38%, respectively. Risperidone, compared with placebo, was associated with more parkinsonism, akathisia, plasma prolactin changes, and weight gain; while quetiapine was associated with more somnolence, sedation, dizziness, constipation, tachycardia, thyroid dysregulation, and weight gain. CONCLUSION: While the combined atypical antipsychotic group did not experience greater improvements than the placebo group, risperidone, but not quetiapine, was significantly superior in all measured domains to placebo in the management of recently exacerbated hospitalized patients with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder, with no unexpected tolerability findings.     

利培酮与氯氮平治疗精神分裂症对照研究

目的 评价利培酮治疗精神分裂症的疗效和副作用。方法 将５９例精神分裂症住院病人随机分配到利培酮１组,利培酮２组和氯氮平组（２０例）,治疗８周。用阳性与阴性症状量表（ＰＡＮＳＳ）评定疗效,用副反应量表及锥体外系副反应量表评定副反应。结果 利培酮两个剂量组与氯氮平组之间疗效无显著性差异。在认知因子,阴性因子,ＰＡＮＳＳ总分减分率方面,利培酮组与氯氮平组有显著性差异,利培酮的副反应有锥体外系反应、失眠、     

喹硫平与利培酮对血清催乳素影响的研究

目的了解喹硫平与利培酮对精神分裂症患者的疗效及对血清催乳素的影响。方法对71例符合CCMD-3诊断标准的精神分裂症患者随机分为喹硫平治疗组（33例）与利培酮治疗组（38例）,观察12周,分别于治疗前及治疗后4周、8周、12周予以阳性症状与阴性症状量表（PANSS）,副反应量表（TESS）及血清催乳素测定。结果喹硫平组和利培酮组疗效差异无显著性,两组治疗后4周、8周及12周PANSS总分及各因子分显著下降（P〈0.01）,利培酮组的不良反应高于喹硫平组,主要表现在肌强直、震颤、泌乳（χ^2=5.69,P〈0.01）及闭经（χ^2=6.74,P〈0.01）等不良反应上,利培酮组治疗后4周、8周及12周血清催乳素明显增加（t=13.48,P〈0.01）,而喹硫平组治疗前后无差异。结论喹硫平与利培酮对精神分裂症均有效,但利培酮不良反应大,明显升高血清催乳素,且有较高高血清催乳素不良反应,而喹硫平对血清催乳素影响较少。     

奎硫平与利培酮治疗精神分裂症的对照研究

目的验正奎硫平治疗精神分裂症的疗效及安全性。方法将121例精神分裂症患者随机分为奎硫平组（61例）与利培酮组（60例）,并进行对照研究,两药治疗剂量分别为200—800mg／d,2～5mg／d,疗程8周。采用阳性和阴性症状量表（PANSS）、简明精神病评定量表（BPRS）、治疗中出现的症状量表（TESS）进行评定及有关实验室检查。结果治疗结束时,两组PANSS和BPRS评分较入组时均显著减低（P〈0．01）,PANSS减分率奎硫平组为（65．7±28．1）,利培酮组为（66．4±27．3）,临床总有效率奎硫平组为70．5％,利培酮组为73．3％;两组疗效差异无显著性。奎硫平组的不良反应较利培酮组少,其中活动减少、震颤、扭转痉挛、静坐不能、口干、视物模糊、便秘、头晕的发生率显著少于利培酮组（P〈0．01或0．05）。结论国产奎硫平治疗精神分裂症的疗效与利培酮相当,部分不良反应较利培酮轻而少,是一种有效、耐受性较好的新型抗精神病药。     

Sexual dysfunction associated with second-generation antipsychotics in outpatients with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder: an empirical evaluation of olanzapine, risperidone, and quetiapine

OBJECTIVE: Evaluate sexual dysfunction, as measured by the Arizona Sexual Experience Scale (ASEX), in olanzapine-, quetiapine-, and risperidone-treated outpatients with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder. METHOD: The sexual functioning of 238 outpatients (age> or =18 years) with diagnoses of schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder who took quetiapine (n=57), olanzapine (n=94), or risperidone (n=87) was evaluated with a one-time rating of the ASEX. The dose range for each treatment group was 5 to 40 mg/day (M=16.6 mg/day, SD=7.4) for olanzapine; 1 to 8 mg/day (M=3.9 mg/day, SD=1.6) for risperidone; and 50 to 900 mg/day (M=376.8 mg/day, SD=213.4) for quetiapine. Antipsychotic group designation was based on medication treatment at study entry (i.e., non-random assignment). Participant characteristics were collected to test for treatment group differences and for potential associations with severity of sexual dysfunction. The primary data analysis was a mixed linear model analysis of covariance with age, gender, and presence/absence of antidepressant known to cause sexual dysfunction included as covariates. RESULTS: There was a significant treatment effect on severity of sexual dysfunction, as measured by ASEX total scores (p=.04). The adjusted average ASEX total scores were lower in the quetiapine (M=17.80) than in the risperidone (M=19.69) or olanzapine (M=20.34) groups. Individual comparisons of the treatments on adjusted average ASEX total scores indicated a significant difference between olanzapine and quetiapine (p=.04), but no difference between risperidone and quetiapine (p=.17) or olanzapine and risperidone (p=.76). CONCLUSIONS: Quetiapine was associated with less severe sexual dysfunction than olanzapine and risperidone (albeit the effect between risperidone and quetiapine was not statistically significant). Olanzapine and risperidone were associated with a comparable degree of sexual dysfunction. Patients in all three treatment groups, nonetheless, experienced a moderately high degree of sexual dysfunction. Because the patients were not randomized, conclusions must be interpreted within the context of the quasi-experimental design.     

A comparative efficacy and safety study of long-acting risperidone injection and risperidone oral tablets among hospitalized patients: 12-week randomized, single-blind study

OBJECTIVE: The superiority of risperidone long-acting injection (RLAI) over oral typical and atypical antipsychotics demonstrated in previous studies may be related to the improved drug compliance. The aim of the 12-week randomized, single-blind study was to test whether the superiority of RLAI remained among hospitalized patients that drug compliance could be optimally controlled. METHODS: Fifty hospitalized stable schizophrenic patients, who had maintained on oral risperidone for more than 3 months, were randomized to the RLAI and oral risperidone group. Finally 49 patients (98 %) completed the study, and no dose change of oral risperidone, or RLAI was noted among all patients. RESULTS: The RLAI group showed significantly increased positive score of Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) than the risperidone group (0.72 +/- 3.52 vs. -1.24 +/- 3.81, p = 0.022), but without significance difference for the PANSS total, negative and general psychopathology scores. The RLAI group also showed a significantly improved Udvalg for Kliniske Undersogelser (UKU) Scale (p = 0.037), social life domains of Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36) (p = 0.011), and reduced prolactin level (p = 0.001). CONCLUSION: The results indicated that with optimal controlling of drug compliance among hospitalized patients, RLAI showed no benefit of efficacy over oral risperidone, but with advantages of improved side-effect profiles, social life ratings, and reduced prolactin levels.