首页> 外文期刊>Patient Preference and Adherence >Comparison between neurostimulation techniques rapid transcranial magnetic stimulation vs electroconvulsive therapy for the treatment of resistant depression: patient preference and cost-effectiveness
【24h】

Comparison between neurostimulation techniques rapid transcranial magnetic stimulation vs electroconvulsive therapy for the treatment of resistant depression: patient preference and cost-effectiveness

机译:神经刺激技术快速经颅磁刺激与电抽搐疗法治疗顽固性抑郁症的比较:患者偏好和成本效益

获取原文
获取外文期刊封面目录资料

摘要

Objectives: Major depressive disorder (MDD) is a common disorder, widely distributed in the population, and is often associated with severe symptoms and functional impairment. It has been estimated that 30% of MDD patients do not benefit adequately from therapeutic interventions, including pharmacotherapy and psychotherapy. Treatment-resistant depression (TRD) is generally defined as a failure to achieve remission, despite therapeutic interventions. Aim: The most effective treatment alternatives for TRD are hospitalization, electroconvulsive therapy (ECT), and transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS). Here we compared the clinical effectiveness of ECT and TMS, including success rates, patient responses, side-effect profiles, and financial worthiness. Results: We found that ECT ( P <0.0001) was more effective than TMS ( P <0.012) (not statistically significant in group effect) in TRD patients. However, ECT patients reported a higher percentage of side effects ( P <0.01) and the TMS treatment scored better in terms of patient preference. The cost benefit of ECT was higher than that of TMS (US$2075 vs US$814). Patient’s preferences for treatment could be more intense in the TMS, if the TMS is included in the Health Maintenance Organization’s service list. Conclusion: We propose that both of these treatment options should be available in psychiatric wards, thus expanding the therapeutic toolkit for TRD.
机译:目的:重度抑郁症(MDD)是一种常见疾病,广泛分布于人群中,通常与严重的症状和功能障碍有关。据估计,有30%的MDD患者不能从包括药物治疗和心理治疗在内的治疗干预措施中充分受益。抵抗治疗性抑郁症(TRD)通常定义为尽管进行了治疗干预也未能实现缓解。目的:TRD最有效的替代治疗方法是住院,电惊厥治疗(ECT)和经颅磁刺激(TMS)。在这里,我们比较了ECT和TMS的临床有效性,包括成功率,患者反应,副作用和财务状况。结果:我们发现,在TRD患者中,ECT(P <0.0001)比TMS(P <0.012)更为有效(组间差异无统计学意义)。但是,ECT患者报告的副作用百分比更高(P <0.01),而TMS治疗在患者偏爱方面得分更高。 ECT的成本收益高于TMS(2075美元对814美元)。如果TMS包含在Health Maintenance Organization的服务列表中,则患者对TMS的治疗偏好可能会更加强烈。结论:我们建议这两种治疗方法都应在精神科病房中使用,从而扩大TRD的治疗工具包。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号