摘要
目的比较依托咪酯与丙泊酚诱导改良电抽搐治疗(MECT)精神分裂症急性期的疗效,并分析两药的复苏效应和心血管反应差异。方法将60例精神分裂症急性期患者随机分为两组进行MECT治疗(隔日1次,共治疗3次),两组分别给予依托咪酯(0.21～0.3mg/kg)和丙泊酚(1.82～2.44mg/kg)诱导麻醉。治疗前后采用PANSS评估疗效,并记录每次治疗的脑电发作时间、呼吸恢复时间、唤醒时间及抑制指数。结果 MECT治疗3次后,A组阳性量表评分减分率为(37.8±22.1),阴性量表评分减分率为(24.3±15.5),总分减分率为(26.8±11.3);B组分别为(29.4±19.2),(13.41±1.9),(12.3±8.2),两组间比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。A组脑电发作时间为(28.76±3.29)S,B组为(23.84±7.18)S,两组间比较,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);两组间呼吸恢复时间、唤醒时间及抑制指数无显著性差异。结论依托咪酯与丙泊酚诱导MECT治疗精神分裂症急性期的疗效相当,脑电发作效应延长,复苏效应相当。
Objective To assess the effects of the therapy technique applied for MECT by comparing two medicines：etomidate and propofol.Methods Patients were distributed into two groups.Group A were administered etomidate（0.21~0.3mg/kg）,then group B underwent general anaesthesia with propofol（1.82~2.44mg/kg）during MECT,once per 2 days and total 3 times.60 sessions were included with 30 sessions per group.Results The decrease rate in PANSS scale including positive,negative and total scores was similarly in both groups（P0.05）.Prolongation of duration seizures in the etomidate group compared with the propofol group（P0.05）.Group A is（28.76±3.29）S,group B is（23.84±7.18）S.No significant difference between the two groups about time of breath recovery,time of awakening and inhibition index（P0.05）.Conclusion The effectiveness of propofol and etomidate is similar to acute treatment for schizophrenia by requirements of anaesthesia for MECT.Prolongation of duration seizures in the etomidate group.Index of recovery is also similar.
出处
《四川精神卫生》
2010年第2期99-101,共3页
Sichuan Mental Health
基金
上海交通大学医学院附属精神卫生中心院级科研项目基金
