精神分裂症患者认知功能损害与阴阳性症状的关系

目的：探讨精神分裂症认知功能损害与阴性、阳性症状的关系。方法:至73例入组的患者随机给予利培酮、氯氮平治疗12周,并于治疗前、后盲法评定Wisconsin卡片分类测验（WCST）,Wechsler记忆测验（WMS）,阴状症状评定量表（SANS）与阳性症状评定量表（SAPS）。结果：治疗前精神分裂症患者的阴性症状、阳性症状均与认知功能有显著相关。主要与执行功能相关;注意障碍与记忆相关。治疗后,仅SAPS中怪异行为得分与WCST的持续反应数、持续错误数显著相关。结论：精神分裂症的认知功能损害是原发性的,并不是在阳性、阴性症状基础上产生的。     

利培酮与氯氮平治疗对精神分裂症患者认知功能影响的对照研究

目的比较利培酮与氯氮平对精神分裂症患者认知功能的影响。方法将58例精神分裂症患者随机分为两组,分别给予利培酮、氯氮平治疗8周。治疗前治疗8周末分别进行简明精神病评定量表（BPRS）、韦氏成人记忆量表修订本（WMS-RC）、威斯康星卡分类测验（WCST）和数字划销测验（CT）评定,比较利培酮与氯氮平对精神分裂症患者认知功能的影响。结果两组治疗8周后,各项检查项目均有显著改善。结论利培酮与氯氮平均能改善精神分裂症患者的认知功能。     

抗精神病药对精神分裂症患者认知功能的影响

目的：比较利培酮和氯氮平对精神分裂症患者认知功能的影响。方法：对58例精神分裂症患者随机分成两组,分别给予利培酮、氯氮平治疗8周。治疗前和治疗8周末分别进行简明精神病评定量表(BPRS)、韦氏成人记忆量表修订本(WMS-RC)、威斯康星卡片分类测验(WCST)和数字划销测验(CT)评定,比较利培酮和氯氮平对精神分裂症患者认知功能的影响。结果：两组8周后,各项检查项目均有显著好转。结论：利培酮和氯氮平均能改善精神分裂症患者的认知功能。     

利培酮和舒必利对认知障碍的影响对照研究

目的：比较利培酮和舒必利对精神分裂症患者认知功能的影响。方法：精神分裂症患者60例随机分为利培酮组和舒必利组进行6周治疗，用阳性症状与阴性症状量表(PANSS)、数字划销测验(CT)、修订韦氏成人记忆量表(WMS—RC)、威斯康星卡片分类测验(WCST)进行检查，评估药物对认知功能的影响及与精神症状变化的关系。结果：脱落2例。58例患者在治疗6周后PANSS的评分显著下降，CT、WMS—RC、WCST测验成绩均显著提高，利培酮组认知改善主要与阴性症状改善有关；舒必利组认知改善主要与精神症状的阳性症状、一般病理性症状改善有关。结论：利培酮和舒必利均能改善精神分裂症的认知损害，但作用机制可能不同，利培酮对精神分裂症的执行功能疗效更好。     

精神分裂症患者利培酮治疗前后认知功能的研究

目的　了解利培酮治疗对精神分裂症病人认知功能的影响 ,及认知功能与阳性和阴性症状的关系。方法　对 30例精神分裂症或分裂样精神病患者 ,在利培酮治疗前后进行威斯康星卡片分类测验 (WCST)。结果　治疗后WCST总测验次数、持续错误数、非持续错误数均少于治疗前 ,有显著性差异 ,P <0 .0 1或P <0 .0 5。PANSS总分的改善与WCST总测验次数、持续错误数呈正相关 ;阳性症状量表分的下降与WCST总测验次数、持续错误数、非持续错误数呈正相关 ,与正确反应数呈负相关 ;而阴性症状量表分的下降与WCST的各项指标之间无明显相关关系。结论　经利培酮治疗后 ,精神分裂症病人在症状改善的同时 ,认知功能也有明显提高 ,且认知功能的提高与阳性症状的改善存在着明显相关性 ,而与阴性症状的改善关系不大 ,提示两者可能存在异质性。     

利培酮与氯氮平对精神分裂症患者认知功能影响的对照研究

目的：观察利培酮与氯氮平对精神分裂症患者认知功能的影响。方法：将80例精神分裂症住院患者随机分为两组,并分别予以利培酮与氯氮平治疗12周,于入组前及治疗结束时测查威斯康星卡片分类测验,韦氏记忆测验,阳性和阴性症状量表,并与正常人比较,借以分析两药对认知功能的影响。结果：两组间在威斯康星卡片分类测验,韦氏记忆测验,阳性和阴性症状量表中的认知因子分上并无显著性差异,治疗前后比较利培酮组（40例）在记忆,阳性和阴性症状量表中的认知因子分及威斯康星卡片分类测验中的完成分类数和概念的水平,其百分数有显著差异,而氯氮平组（33例）仅在阳性和阴性症状量表中的认知因子及威斯康星卡片分类测验中的概念水平,其百分数有显著差异,在威斯康星卡片分类测验中完成第一个分类的次数有增加趋势。结论：利培酮对认知功能障碍的治疗作用优于氯氮平。     

利培酮和氯氮平对精神分裂症患者P300影响的随机对照研究

目的探讨精神分裂症患者P300的变异,以及氯氮平和利培酮对P300的影响。方法63例精神分裂症患者随机分为利培酮组（32例）和氯氮平组（31例）,进行双盲给药治疗6周。阳性和阴性症状量表（PANSS）评定临床疗效,同时进行P300检测。结果双盲用药后第6周末,两组患者PANSS总分及各分量表分均明显低于第2周末,差异具有显著性,两组之间差异无显著性。与正常组比较,利培酮组和氯氮平组N1潜伏期、P3潜伏期、P3-N1潜伏期之差明显延长,P3波幅明显降低,差异均具有显著性。经利培酮和氯氮平治疗后两组患者潜伏期和波幅自身前后对比差异均无显著性,两组之间比较差异亦无显著性。氯氮平组患者PANSS阳性症状分与P300的P3潜伏期、P3～N1潜伏期显著负相关,阴性症状分和P3潜伏期明显正相关。利培酮组患者PANSS评分与P300各项指标无明显相关。结论利培酮和氯氮平均能有效治疗精神分裂症患者。精神分裂症患者P300潜伏期和波幅有明显异常,利培酮对P300无明显影响,而氯氮平可能影响P300的潜伏期。     

奎的平与利培酮对精神分裂症认知功能的影响

目的 比较奎的平与利培酮对精神分裂症患者认知功能的影响。方法 将60例精神分裂症住院患者随机分为两组，并给予奎的平与利培酮治疗6周，于入组前及治疗结束时测查数字划销测验(CT)，修订韦氏记忆测验(WMS-RC)，威斯康星卡片分类测验(WCST)，分析两药对认知功能的影响。结果 两组治疗后WMS-RC测验的记忆商数均显著提高；奎的平组CT、WCST测验仅有部分项目成绩改善，利培酮组CT、WCST测验所有项目均改善显著。结论 两药对精神分裂症认知损害均有显著疗效，利培酮对注意、执行功能改善效果更明显。     

奎硫平对首发精神分裂症认知功能的影响

目的:探讨奎硫平对首发精神分裂症患者认知功能的影响。方法:将71例精神分裂症患者随机分为两组,分别给予奎硫平和氯丙嗪治疗8周。于治疗前、治疗8周末分别用阳性与阴性症状量表(PANSS)评定疗效,用威斯康星卡片分类测验(WCST)、数字划消测验(CT)、修订韦氏成人记忆量表(WMS-RC)评定认知功能。结果:两组PANSS分值治疗前后差异均有显著性(P<0.01);但两组之间比较,差异无显著性(P>0.05)。治疗8周末奎硫平组WCST总测验次数、持续错误数、非持续错误数,CT,WMS-RC测验成绩均显著提高(P<0.05~0.01);而氯丙嗪组则无明显变化(P>0.05)。结论:奎硫平与氯丙嗪对首发精神分裂症患者疗效相当,但奎硫平对首发精神分裂症患者认知功能改善明显。     

利培酮和氯氮平治疗伴抑郁症状的难治性精神分裂症对照研究

目的：比较利培酮和氯氮平对伴抑郁症状的难治性精神分裂症疗效。方法：共70例难治性精神分裂症患者随机服用利培酮和氯氮平治疗。利培酮组34例,氯氮平组36例;伴有抑郁症状者39例,利培酮组17例,氯氮平组22例。治疗12周。分别于治疗前、治疗4、8、12周末采用阳性与阴性症状量表（PANSS）,汉密尔顿抑郁量表（HAMD）及功能大体评定量表（GAF）评定疗效。结果：两组PANSS、HAMD和GAF评分在治疗12周均有显著改善;两组间比较差异无显著性。有、无抑郁症状组在治疗4、8、12周末的HAMD总分与治疗前比较均显著减少。结论：抑郁症状不影响难治性精神分裂症的疗效;利培酮和氯氮平对伴抑郁症状的难治性精神分裂症均有效。     

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、     

A double-blind comparative study of clozapine and risperidone in the management of severe chronic schizophrenia

OBJECTIVE: This prospective, double-blind, multicenter, parallel-group study compared the efficacy and safety of therapeutic doses of clozapine and risperidone in patients with severe chronic schizophrenia and poor previous treatment response. METHOD: Male or female patients aged 18-65 years who met DSM-IV criteria for schizophrenia and study requirements for poor previous treatment response (N=273) were randomly assigned to double-blind treatment with either clozapine or risperidone administered over 12 weeks in increasing increments. The primary efficacy measures were the magnitude of improvement in Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS) and Clinical Global Impression (CGI) scores. Adverse events were recorded throughout the study. RESULTS: The magnitude of improvement in mean BPRS and CGI scores from baseline to end of the study was significantly greater in the clozapine group than in the risperidone group. Statistically significant differences in favor of clozapine were also seen for most of the secondary efficacy measures (Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale, Calgary Depression Scale, Psychotic Depression Scale, and Psychotic Anxiety Scale). The adverse event profile was similar for both treatment groups, with a lower risk of extrapyramidal symptoms in the clozapine group. CONCLUSIONS: Clozapine showed superior efficacy over risperidone in this patient population. Both treatments were equally well tolerated as demonstrated through their adverse event profiles, although as expected clozapine was associated with a lower risk of extrapyramidal symptoms than risperidone.     

氯氮平和利培酮治疗精神分裂症患者比较研究

目的 评价氯氮平和利培酮治疗精神分裂症的疗效和副作用。方法 将40例精神分裂症患者随机分为氯氮平组和利培酮组(氯氮平组20例,利培酮组20例),于治疗前和治疗12周末各作一次韦氏成人智力量表、韦氏记忆量表、威斯康星卡片分类测验、言语流利性测验、连线测验A、简明精神症状评定量表(BPRS)、TESS副反应量表。结果 治疗12周末氯氮平组显著改善BPRS评分,利培酮组显著改善迟滞、思维障碍、敌对猜疑因子分,但氯氮平组较利培酮组敌对猜疑因子分减分率高。两组之间副反应评分有显著性差异,利培酮组明显低于氯氮平组,其余各项无显著性差异。结论 氯氮平较利培酮治疗敌对猜疑效果好,但利培酮较氯氮平副作用小,安全性较高。     

利培酮、氯氮平维持治疗精神分裂症患者生活质量的对照观察

目的　比较利培酮与氯氮平治疗对精神分裂症患者生活质量的影响。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 ,出院 3个月时用生活质量综合评定问卷 (GQOLI)评估患者的生活质量 ,用阳性症状和阴性症状量表 (PANSS)、不良反应量表 (TESS)评定疗效与副反应。结果　利培酮组GQOLI评分显著高于氯氮平组 (P <0 .0 1) ,TESS评分显著低于氯氮平组 (P <0 .0 1) ,PANSS评分两组差异无显著性 (P >0 .0 5 )。结论　利培酮和氯氮平相比 ,更能提高患者的生活质量 ,在维持治疗方面具有明显的优势     

Clozapine augmented with risperidone in the treatment of schizophrenia: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

OBJECTIVE: The authors evaluated the efficacy and safety of augmenting clozapine with risperidone in patients with treatment-resistant schizophrenia. METHOD: In a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled 12-week trial, 40 patients unresponsive or partially responsive to clozapine monotherapy received a steady dose of clozapine combined with either placebo (N=20) or up to 6 mg/day of risperidone (N=20). Patient psychopathology was assessed at 2-week intervals with the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS) and the Scale for the Assessment of Negative Symptoms (SANS), among other measures. Movement disorders were assessed with the Simpson-Angus Rating Scale. RESULTS: From baseline to week 6 and week 12, mean BPRS total and positive symptom subscale scores were reduced significantly in both groups, but the reductions were significantly greater with clozapine/risperidone treatment. Reductions in SANS scores were also significantly greater with clozapine/risperidone treatment than with clozapine/placebo. The adverse event profile for clozapine/risperidone treatment was similar to that for clozapine/placebo. Simpson-Angus Rating Scale scores were lower with clozapine/risperidone treatment throughout the trial but increased to approach those of clozapine/placebo treatment at week 12. Clozapine/risperidone treatment did not induce additional weight gain, agranulocytosis, or seizures compared with clozapine/placebo treatment. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with a suboptimal response to clozapine, the addition of risperidone improved overall symptoms and positive and negative symptoms of schizophrenia. The combination appears to be safe and well tolerated. Augmentation of clozapine with risperidone may provide additional clinical benefit for patients who are nonresponsive or only partially responsive to clozapine alone.     

利培酮合并氯硝西泮治疗精神分裂症急性兴奋的研究

目的 与氯氮平和氟哌啶醇相对照,观察利培酮合并氯硝西泮治疗精神分裂症急性兴奋的疗效及不良反应特点。方法 254例精神分裂症急性期中度兴奋患者,随机分为口服利培酮合并肌内注射氯硝西泮组(88例,以下简称利培酮组)、口服氯氮平组(84例,氯氮平组)和肌内注射氟哌啶醇组(82例,氟哌啶醇组)治疗,疗程均为7 d。治疗期间每日评估阳性和阴性症状量表(PANSS)兴奋因子(PANSS-EC)和治疗中需处理的不良反应量表。结果 利培酮组的疗效与氯氮平组、氟哌啶醇组比较,经重复测量分析显示PANSS-EC分,差异无显著性(F=1.65,P=0.194)。3组精神分裂症患者的急性兴奋症状均获明显改善(各组组内治疗前后比较,F=415.35,P<0.01)。氟哌啶醇组锥体外系副反应发生率高于利培酮组和氯氮平组(P<0.01);氯氮平组嗜睡、便秘、流涎和心动过速的发生率高于利培酮组和氟哌啶醇组(P<0.05-0.01)。结论 利培酮合并氯硝西泮可有效治疗精神分裂症急性期中度兴奋患者,疗效与氯氮平和氟哌啶醇的疗效相当;安全性优于氯氮平和氟哌啶醇。     

Effectiveness of clozapine versus olanzapine, quetiapine, and risperidone in patients with chronic schizophrenia who did not respond to prior atypical antipsychotic treatment

OBJECTIVE: When a schizophrenia patient has an inadequate response to treatment with an antipsychotic drug, it is unclear what other antipsychotic to switch to and when to use clozapine. In this study, the authors compared switching to clozapine with switching to another atypical antipsychotic in patients who had discontinued treatment with a newer atypical antipsychotic in the context of the Clinical Antipsychotic Trials for Interventions Effectiveness (CATIE) investigation. METHOD: Ninety-nine patients who discontinued treatment with olanzapine, quetiapine, risperidone, or ziprasidone in phase 1 or 1B of the trials, primarily because of inadequate efficacy, were randomly assigned to open-label treatment with clozapine (N=49) or blinded treatment with another newer atypical antipsychotic not previously received in the trial (olanzapine [N=19], quetiapine [N=15], or risperidone [N=16]). RESULTS: Time until treatment discontinuation for any reason was significantly longer for clozapine (median=10.5 months) than for quetiapine (median=3.3), or risperidone (median=2.8), but not for olanzapine (median=2.7). Time to discontinuation because of inadequate therapeutic effect was significantly longer for clozapine than for olanzapine, quetiapine, or risperidone. At 3-month assessments, Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale total scores had decreased more in patients treated with clozapine than in patients treated with quetiapine or risperidone but not olanzapine. One patient treated with clozapine developed agranulocytosis, and another developed eosinophilia; both required treatment discontinuation. CONCLUSIONS: For these patients with schizophrenia who prospectively failed to improve with an atypical antipsychotic, clozapine was more effective than switching to another newer atypical antipsychotic. Safety monitoring is necessary to detect and manage clozapine's serious side effects.     

利培酮口服液治疗首发精神分裂症急性期对照观察

目的:探讨利培酮13服液治疗首发精神分裂症急性期的疗效和安全性.方法:96例精神分裂症的急性期患者随机分为两组,分别给予利培酮口服液(研究组,n=49)和氯氮平(对照组,n=47)单药治疗4周.采用阳性和阴性症状量表(PANSS)评定临床疗效,临床总体印象量表(CGI-SI)评定病情严重程度,治疗中出现的症状量表(TE...