论文部分内容阅读
目的:评价电针联合小剂量氯氮平治疗难治性精神分裂症的有效性和安全性。方法:将难治性精神分裂症患者随机分为西药组和针药结合组各40例。西药组患者均采用口服氯氮平治疗;针药结合组患者选百会及太阳穴电针治疗,同时口服小剂量氯氮平。比较两组患者治疗前后阳性与阴性症状量表(PAN-SS)、副反应量表(TESS)评分及临床疗效。结果:两组治疗后PANSS均下降,且两组比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。治疗后针药结合组TESS评分结果显著低于西药组(P<0.01)。西药组愈显率35.0%(14/40),有效率77.5%(31/40),针药结合组愈显率32.5%(13/40),有效率72.5%(29/40),两组比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论:两组方法治疗难治性精神分裂症疗效相当,而针药结合组不良反应更轻,提示电针配合小剂量氯氮平是治疗难治性精神分裂症的较好方法。
Objective: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of electroacupuncture combined with low-dose clozapine in the treatment of refractory schizophrenia. Methods: The patients with refractory schizophrenia were randomly divided into western medicine group and acupuncture combination group of 40 cases. The patients in the western medicine group were treated with oral clozapine. The patients in the acupuncture combined with medicine group were treated with electroacupuncture at the Baihui and temples, and oral low-dose clozapine at the same time. The positive and negative symptom scores (PAN-SS), the TESS score and the clinical curative effect were compared between the two groups before and after treatment. Results: The PANSS of both groups decreased after treatment, and there was no significant difference between the two groups (P> 0.05). After treatment, the TESS score of acupuncture combination group was significantly lower than that of western medicine group (P <0.01). In the western medicine group, the cure rate was 35.0% (14/40), the effective rate was 77.5% (31/40), the acupuncture combination rate was 32.5% (13/40), the effective rate was 72.5% (29/40) The difference was not statistically significant (P> 0.05). CONCLUSION: The two methods are effective in treating refractory schizophrenia, while the adverse reactions in acupuncture and drug combination group are lighter, suggesting that electroacupuncture combined with low-dose clozapine is a better treatment for refractory schizophrenia.