基于真实世界原则的电针与抗抑郁药治疗抑郁症临床效果评价研究

Clinical Study of Electro-acupuncture and Antidepressants on Depression Based on Real World Study Principle

目的:观察电针与选择性五羟色胺再摄取抑制剂类抗抑郁药(SSRIs)治疗抑郁症的临床效果及两种干预措施的疗效特点。方法:本研究基于真实世界研究(RWS)原则,纳入60例抑郁症患者,按患者意愿分为电针组(35例)和西药组(25例),电针组选取百会、印堂作为主穴,随证配穴,西药组服用选择性5-羟色胺再摄取抑制剂类药物。治疗8周,治疗结束4周后随访。选用汉密尔顿抑郁量表(HAMD-24)和健康调查简表(SF-36)在治疗前后及随访时进行临床评价。结果:治疗8周后,电针组痊愈率为57.14%,西药组为12%,2组痊愈率比较差异有统计学意义,治疗后HAMD-24总评分差异有统计学意义。2种干预手段治疗前后抑郁症患者生存质量总评分、生理职能、总体健康、精力、社会功能、情感职能、精神健康6个领域评分均差异有统计学意义,其中躯体疼痛、生理机能和总体健康状况领域电针和西药差异有统计学意义。结论:电针与SSRIs均能改善抑郁症患者抑郁程度,提高抑郁症患者的总体生存质量,其中电针对躯体疼痛改善作用明显,SSRIs对生理机能和总体健康状况改善效果明显。

Objective： To observe the clinical effectiveness and features of electro-acupuncture（ EA） and Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors（ SSRIs） on depression. Methods： Based on the Real World Study（ RWS） principle,60 participants who were diagnosed for depression were enrolled into an 8-week non-randomized controlled study and were divided into EA group（ n = 35） and SSRIs group（ n = 25） according to their preference. The Hamilton Depression Rating Scale（ HAMD） and the MOS item short from health survey（ SF-36） were used to evaluate the depressive severity and quality of life（ QOL） respectively before and after treatment. Results： After 8 weeks intervention,there were significant differences between EA and SSRIs groups in remission rate and the HAMD total score. There were also significant differences between the two groups in overall QOL,role-physical,general health,vitality,social functioning,roleemotional and mental health. In addition,EA and SSRIs had significant difference with respect to bodily pain,physical functioning and general health. Conclusions： Both EA and SSRIs intervention could improve depression and QOL. EA had advantage on improving bodily pain,and SSRIs improved physical functioning better.