氟西汀合并认知行为疗法治疗强迫症的对照分析

目的　评价氟西汀合并认知行为疗法对强迫症的治疗效果。方法　将符合CCMD - 3诊断标准的 5 7例强迫症患者随机分为治疗组和对照组 ,治疗组给予氟西汀合并认知行为治疗 ,对照组只给予氟西汀治疗。应用临床疗效标准及耶鲁布朗强迫量表 (Y -BOCS)定期评定疗效。疗程 6个月。结果　在治疗第 1、2、4和 6个月末 ,治疗组疗效优于对照组 ,尤其是对强迫行为疗效更好 ,具有极显著性统计学意义 (P <0 0 1)。结论　氟西汀合并认知行为疗法治疗强迫症效果优于单独用氟西汀治疗。     

氟西汀合并利培酮治疗强迫症对照研究

目的评价氟西汀合并利培酮对强迫症的治疗效果。方法将符合CCMD-3诊断标准的60例强迫症患者随机分为治疗组和对照组,治疗组给予氟西汀合并利培酮治疗,对照组只给予氟西汀治疗,应用汉密尔顿焦虑量表(HAMA)及耶鲁布朗强迫量表(Y-BOCS)定期评定疗效。应用副反应量表(TESS)评定不良反应。疗程8周。结果在治疗第2、4、6、8周末,治疗组疗效优于对照组,尤其是对强迫思维疗效更好,具有显著性统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论氟西汀合并利培酮治疗强迫症效果优于单用氟西汀治疗。     

盐酸氟西汀联合认知行为疗法治疗产后抑郁症疗效观察

目的 探讨盐酸氟西汀联合认知行为疗法治疗产后抑郁症的临床疗效及不良反应.方法 入组103例产后抑郁症患者分为2组,联合治疗组53例接受盐酸氟西汀联合认知行为疗法,对照组50例仅接受盐酸氟西汀治疗.2组均治疗6周.然后采用汉密尔顿抑郁量表（HAMD）评价治疗效果,同时采用不良反应量表（TESS）评价盐酸氟西汀的不良反应.结果 联合治疗组总有效率84.9%,远高于对照组68.0%（P〈0.05）.联合治疗组治疗后HAMD评分低于对照组（P〈0.05）.2组药物不良反应比较差异无统计学意义（P〉0.05）.结论 盐酸氟西汀联合认知行为疗法治疗产后抑郁症的临床疗效优于单用盐酸氟西汀,而不良反应并未增加.     

帕罗西汀联合认知行为疗法治疗强迫症的临床对照研究

目的比较单用帕罗西汀与帕罗西汀联合认知行为疗法对强迫症的临床疗效。方法采用半随机法将符合《中国精神障碍分类与诊断标准(第3版)》(CCMD-3)强迫症诊断标准的86例患者分为研究组和对照组各43例,两组均给予帕罗西汀治疗,研究组在此基础上给予每周1次的认知行为治疗,均观察12周。于治疗前和治疗后第4、8、12周分别采用耶鲁-布朗强迫量表(Y-BOCS)、汉密尔顿焦虑量表(HAMA)评定临床疗效,于治疗第4、8、12周采用副反应量表(TESS)评定不良反应。结果治疗4周末起两组Y-BOCS总评分均较治疗前低(P均0.01),研究组HAMA评分低于对照组(P0.01),第8周末起研究组Y-BOCS评分低于对照组(P0.05);治疗12周末,研究组强迫行为因子评分低于对照组(P0.05),且研究组总有效率高于对照组(86.05%vs.62.79%,P0.05),研究组和对照组不良反应发生率差异无统计学意义(16.28%vs.20.93%,P0.05)。结论单用帕罗西汀与帕罗西汀联合认知行为疗法均可缓解强迫障碍患者症状,但帕罗西汀联合认知行为疗法的效果优于单用帕罗西汀治疗,尤其对强迫行为的改善更为突出。     

氟西汀和氯米帕明治疗中性强迫症的对照研究

目的 评价氟西汀和氯米帕明对难治性强迫症的疗效。方法 符合CCMD－2－R强迫症诊断标准的难治性病人共60例,随机分为两组,分别用氟西汀和氯米帕明系统治疗8周。采用耶鲁布郎强迫量表（Y－BOCS）和药物副反应量表（TESS）评价疗效及主要副反应。结果 两药的总体疗效相当;氟西汀对强迫性行为见效快,疗效好,副作用小,尤其是心血管系统及抗胆碱能副反应少,远期效果优于氯米帕明。结论 氟西汀尤其适用于伴有心血管痢疾而又以强迫行为为主的难治性强迫症病人。     

呋喃唑酮合并认知行为疗法治疗酒依赖对照研究

目的:评价呋喃唑酮合并认知行为疗法对酒依赖的治疗效果。方法:将55例酒依赖患者随机分为两组,联合治疗组给予呋喃唑酮合并认知行为治疗,呋喃唑酮组单用呋喃唑酮治疗,应用临床疗效标准及酒依赖严重程度问卷(SADQC)定期评定。疗程6个月。结果:在治疗1、2、4个月和6个月时,联合治疗组疗效显著优于呋喃唑酮组,尤其是对情感性戒断症状疗效更好。结论:呋喃唑酮合并认知行为疗法治疗酒依赖效果优于单用呋喃唑酮治疗。     

博乐欣合并认知行为疗法治疗惊恐障碍对照研究

目的 观察博乐欣合并认知行为疗法对惊恐障碍的治疗效果。方法 将符合CCMD-2-R诊断标准的37例惊恐障碍患者分为治疗组和对照组,治疗组给予博乐欣(50—150mg/d)合并认知行为治疗,对照组只给予博乐欣(50—150mg/d)治疗,应用临床标准疗效及HAMA和CGI—SI定期评定;观察6个月。结果 在治疗1个月、3个月和6个月时,治疗组疗效均优于对照组,具有极显著性统计学意义(P<0.01)。两组仅个别病人在治疗的前2周出现头痛、恶心、胃不适症状,无需处理,尤以合并认知治疗组显著较轻。结论 博乐欣合并认知行为治疗效果优于单用药物的治疗,且可明显缩短疗程,减少医疗开支。     

西酞普兰联合认知行为疗法治疗强迫症对照观察

目的：比较西酞普兰联合认知行为治疗与单用西酞普兰治疗强迫症的临床疗效。方法：将Yale-Brown强迫量表（Y-BOCS）评分≥16分的64例强迫症患者随机分为研究组（西酞普兰联合认知行为治疗）和对照组（单用西酞普兰治疗）,每组各32例,疗程6个月。于治疗前及治疗1、2、4和6个月时采用Y-BOCS评定疗效。结果：治疗后研究组和对照组Y-BOCS评分分别为（9.41±3.87）分和（12.37±5.34）分,较治疗前（25.26±5.38）分和（24.23±4.25）分显著下降（P〈0.05或P〈0.01）;以研究组下降更为显著（P〈0.05或P〈0.01）,其中强迫性思维和强迫性行为因子评分在治疗6个月时仍维持降分（P〈0.01）。结论：西酞普兰联合认知行为治疗强迫症较单用西酞普兰疗效更好。     

氯丙咪嗪合并暴露疗法与单用氯丙咪嗪治疗强迫症的对照研究

目的：探讨药物合并行为治疗强迫症的效果。方法：将符合CCMD－2－R强迫症诊断标准的28例病人，随机分成两组，14例在氯丙咪嗪治疗的基础上联用暴露疗法做为研究组，另14例单用氯丙咪嗪 治疗做为对照组，均系统治疗8周，用耶鲁－布朗强迫症量表（Y－BOCS）减分率评定两组治疗的疗效，结果；氯丙咪嗪合并暴露疗法组的疗效优单用氯丙咪嗪组，尤其是在控制强迫行为方面更为突出。结论：氯丙咪嗪合并暴露疗法尤其适用于以强迫行为为主的强迫症病人。     

帕罗西汀合并暴露疗法治疗强迫症对照研究

目的 探讨暴露疗法对强迫症的疗效,并比较暴露疗法对强迫观念及强迫行为疗效的差异.方法 将符合CCMD-3强迫症诊断标准的32例病人,随机将其中的16例在帕罗西汀治疗的基础上联用暴露疗法做为研究组,另16例单用帕罗西汀治疗做为对照组,均系统治疗8周,用耶鲁-布朗强迫症量表（Y-BOCS）减分率评定两组治疗强迫症的疗效.结果 帕罗西汀合并暴露疗法组的疗效优于单用帕罗西汀组,尤其是在控制强迫性行为方面更为突出.结论 帕罗西汀合并暴露疗法尤其适用于以强迫行为为主的强迫症病人.     

认知领悟疗法配合药物治疗强迫症

目的评论认知领悟疗法结合药物治疗的治疗效果，与单纯应用药物治疗的疗效比较。方法将符舍中国精神障碍分类与诊断标准第3版的38例强迫症患者，随机分为研究组与对照组。对照组单纯用药（SSRⅠ类药物，苯二氮革类及中成药）。研究组在上述用药的基础上再按照钟友彬教授认知领悟疗法的原理方法和步骤进行认知领悟治疗。普布朗（Y—BOCS）强迫量表评出3～6个月的Y—BOCS积分。结果强迫症认知领悟疗法辅以SSRI类等药物治疗，效果明显优于单一的药物治疗。结论强迫症的认知领悟疗法辅以SSRI类药物治疗，疗效好，更适合强迫症的治疗，值得提倡。     

米氮平治疗强迫症对照研究

目的:比较米氮平与氟西汀治疗强迫症的疗效和不良反应.方法:分别用米氮平和氟西汀治疗强迫症各27例,疗程8周.应用Yale-Brown强迫症量表(Y-BOCS)、汉密尔顿抑郁量表(HAMD)及汉密尔顿焦虑量表(HAMA)评定疗效.结果:治疗后米氮平组与氟西汀组Y-BOCS、HAMD、HAMA分值均显著下降,两组间疗效差异无显著性.米氮平组不良反应明显少于氟西汀组.结论:米氮平治疗强迫症疗效与氟西汀相仿,不良反应少,可在临床使用.     

Controlled comparisons of clomipramine and fluoxetine in the treatment of obsessive-compulsive disorder. Behavioral and biological results

Treatment with fluoxetine hydrochloride was compared with treatment with clomipramine hydrochloride in two groups of patients with obsessive-compulsive disorder using two different experimental designs. In the first group of 11 patients with obsessive-compulsive disorder studied using a randomized, double-blind, crossover design, treatment with fluoxetine for 10 weeks was found to produce therapeutic effects similar to treatment with clomipramine for 10 weeks. There were significantly fewer total side effects reported during fluoxetine than clomipramine treatment. Drug tapering and placebo substitution in the 4-week crossover interval phase led to substantial relapses in obsessive-compulsive disorder symptoms and depression. Furthermore, responses to the second drug took as long to occur as responses to the first drug, although both drugs are thought to act by a common mechanism, serotonin uptake inhibition. A second group of 21 patients with obsessive-compulsive disorder that had been previously stabilized on clomipramine treatment with at least partial benefit were crossed over to fluoxetine treatment in a double-blind fashion. After 10 weeks of fluoxetine administration, most patients manifested behavioral rating scores of obsessive-compulsive disorder and depressive symptoms that were comparable with precrossover ratings completed during clomipramine treatment. A significant exacerbation in obsessive-compulsive disorder and depression ratings as well as a similar lag in therapeutic efficacy were also noted in this second cohort of patients with obsessive-compulsive disorder. Platelet 5-HT concentrations were reduced 95% during both clomipramine and fluoxetine treatment periods. These results suggest that fluoxetine may represent a viable alternative to clomipramine in the treatment of obsessive-compulsive disorder, although further studies with larger sample sizes are needed.     

Behavior therapy augments response of patients with obsessive-compulsive disorder responding to drug treatment

OBJECTIVE: In many patients with obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD), residual symptoms persist despite a clinically meaningful response. The objective of this study was to examine whether addition of behavior therapy would augment treatment outcome in these patients. METHOD: Ninety-six patients with DSM-IV OCD who had responded to 3 months of drug treatment were randomly assigned to either receive addition of behavior therapy or continue on drug treatment alone for 6 months. Patients who continued on drug treatment alone eventually received addition of behavior therapy for 6 months. Data were gathered from October 1998 to June 2002. RESULTS: OCD patients who received addition of behavior therapy showed a greater improvement in obsessive-compulsive symptoms (Yale-Brown Obsessive Compulsive Scale [Y-BOCS] score change = -3.9 in the completers sample) than those who continued on drug treatment alone (Y-BOCS score change = +3.9 for completers). Significantly more patients who received addition of behavior therapy were in remission compared with those who continued on drug treatment alone (p < .0001 for completers). Patients who received behavior therapy after 6 months of drug treatment alone showed a nonsignificant decline in obsessive-compulsive symptoms (Y-BOCS score change = -2.7 for completers); however, the remission rate found in this group was comparable to the remission rate found in the group of patients receiving addition of behavior therapy directly after responding to drug treatment. CONCLUSION: The results indicate that addition of behavior therapy is beneficial for patients who have responded to drug treatment. The data also suggest that the effect is greater when behavior therapy is added immediately after attainment of the drug response.     

Group cognitive-behavioral therapy versus sertraline for the treatment of children and adolescents with obsessive-compulsive disorder

OBJECTIVE: To compare the effectiveness of group cognitive-behavioral therapy (GCBT) and of sertraline in treatment-na?ve children and adolescents with obsessive-compulsive disorder. METHOD: Between 2000 and 2002, 40 subjects between 9 and 17 years old were randomized to receive GCBT (n = 20) or sertraline (n = 20). GCBT consisted of a manual-based 12-week cognitive-behavioral protocol adapted for groups, and treatment with sertraline involved medication intake for 12 weeks. Subjects were assessed before, during, and after treatment (at 1, 3, 6, and 9 months after treatment conclusion). Primary outcome measure was the Children's Yale-Brown Obsessive-Compulsive Scale. Repeated-measures analyses of variance were done. RESULTS: Both GCBT and sertraline conditions had significant improvement in obsessive-compulsive disorder symptoms as measured by the Children's Yale-Brown Obsessive-Compulsive Scale after 12 weeks of treatment. After the 9-month follow-up period, subjects in the GCBT condition had a significantly lower rate of symptom relapse than those in the sertraline group. CONCLUSIONS: The treatment with GCBT may be effective in decreasing obsessive-compulsive symptoms in childhood obsessive-compulsive disorder and should be considered as an alternative to either individual cognitive-behavioral therapy or a medication, such as sertraline. Results support the effectiveness and the maintenance of gains of GCBT in the treatment of youngsters with obsessive-compulsive disorder.