摘要
目的比较佐匹克隆与艾司唑仑治疗老年睡眠障碍的临床疗效。方法选取陕西省人民医院收治的200例老年睡眠障碍患者,随机分为两组,艾司唑仑组(96例)给予艾司唑仑治疗,佐匹克隆组(104例)采用佐匹克隆治疗,通过对患者治疗2周的疗效,治疗前、治疗2周的SRSS评分、HAMA评分及不良反应情况进行记录,评价佐匹克隆与艾司唑仑治疗老年睡眠障碍的疗效。结果治疗2周,佐匹克隆组与艾司唑仑组治疗睡眠障碍的有效率分别为95.2%和90.6%,两组有效率相比,差异没有统计学意义。与治疗前相比,治疗2周,两组SRSS评分均明显降低(P<0.05),但两组间SRSS评分相比,差异没有统计学意义。与治疗前相比,治疗2周两组HAMA评分均有所降低(P<0.05),但佐匹克隆组HAMA评分与艾司唑仑组相比,差异没有统计学意义。治疗2周期间,佐匹克隆组不良反应发生率明显低于艾司唑仑组(P<0.05)。结论艾司唑仑和佐匹克隆对老年睡眠障碍均具有较好的治疗作用,但佐匹克隆不良反应少,且症状轻微,是短期治疗老年睡眠障碍的首选药物。
Objective To discuss the clinical efficacy of zopiclone and estazolum in treatment of elderly patients with sleep disorder. Methods Totally 200 elderly patients with sleep disorder were selected, the estazolum group （96 cases） were given estazolum, the zopiclone group （104 cases） were given zopiclone. The efficacy of zopiclone and estazolum in treatment of sleep disorder was evaluated by recording the efficacy after 2 weeks treatment, SRSS scores before and after treatment, HAMA scores before and after treatment, and adverse reactions. Results After 2 weeks treatment, the efficiencies of zopiclone group and estazolam group were 95.2% and 90.6%, without statistical significance on effective rate between two groups. Compared with the value before treatment, the scores of SRSS in two groups were decreased in two groups after two weeks treatment （P 〈 0.05）. There was no statistical significance on SRSS scores between two groups. Compared with the value before treatment, the scores of llAMA in two groups were decreased in two groups after two weeks treatment （P 〈 0.05）. But there were no statistical significance on HAMA between two groups. In two weeks treatment, the accident rate of adverse reaction in zopiclone group was lower than that of estazolum group （P 〈 0.05）. Conclusion Estazolam and zopiclone have good effect on sleep disorder. But zopiclone has less adverse reaction and mild symptoms. It is the first choice to treat elderly people with sleep disorder in short-term.
出处
《药物评价研究》
CAS
2016年第6期1047-1049,共3页
Drug Evaluation Research
