...
首页> 外文期刊>Human psychopharmacology: clinical and experimental >Differences in cognitive factors between 'true drug' versus 'placebo pattern' response to fluoxetine as defined by pattern analysis.
【24h】

Differences in cognitive factors between 'true drug' versus 'placebo pattern' response to fluoxetine as defined by pattern analysis.

机译:认知因素差异”真实药物”与“安慰剂”应对模式氟西汀所定义的模式分析。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

OBJECTIVE: Pattern analysis has identified two types of response patterns to antidepressants: "true drug" response (TDR) and "placebo pattern" response (PPR). This study examines the relationship between cognitive factors and TDR and PPR to fluoxetine. METHODS: We assessed 310 outpatients meeting DSM-III-R criteria for major depressive disorder (MDD) who were enrolled in an 8-week open trial of fluoxetine 20 mg/day. Response patterns were determined using the clinical global impressions-improvement (CGI-I). We administered the following self-rated scales to all patients at the baseline visit and at endpoint: perceived stress scale (PSS), cognitions questionnaire (CQ), Beck hopelessness scale (BHS) and dysfunctional attitudes scale (DAS). RESULTS: One hundred and thirty-four patients had TDR, 66 patients had PPR, and 110 patients were non-responders (NR). Demographic variables and severity of depression at baseline (HAMD-17) were not significantly different between the two response pattern groups. We compared cognitive factors before and after treatment across patients with TDR and PPR, and there were no significant differences at baseline in CQ, PSS, BHS, and DAS scores. At endpoint, outpatients with PPR had significantly lower scores on the PSS (p < 0.001) compared to the patients with TDR, even after adjusting for multiple comparisons and severity of depression at endpoint. CONCLUSIONS: Significant differences in cognitive/psychological factors, specifically lower post-treatment perceived stress, accompany "placebo" pattern of response to antidepressant treatment and differentiate it from "true drug" response pattern, as defined by pattern analysis. Copyright (c) 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
机译:摘要目的:分析已经确定了两个模式类型的响应模式来抗抑郁药:“真正的药物”响应(TDR)和“安慰剂模式”响应(PPR)。认知因素和热带病研究和培训特别规划之间的关系和PPR氟西汀。门诊病人会议结合为主要标准抑郁症(MDD)注册了一个8周公开审判的氟西汀20毫克/天。确定使用响应模式临床全球impressions-improvement (CGI-I)。我们进行以下自我报告所有患者在基线和访问端点:感知压力量表(PSS),认知问卷(CQ),贝克绝望量表(黑洞)和功能失调性态度量表(DAS)。患者热带病研究和培训特别规划,66名患者PPR, 110患者无(NR)。变量和抑郁症的严重程度在基线(HAMD-17)没有显著不同两者之间的反应模式组。相比之前和之后的认知因素治疗在患者热带病研究和培训特别规划和PPR,在基线没有明显差异CQ、PSS、黑洞和DAS的分数。门诊病人与PPR显著降低PSS的分数相比(p < 0.001)热带病研究和培训特别规划,患者甚至在调整了多重比较和抑郁症的严重性在端点。在认知、心理因素,特别是降低后处理感知压力,陪伴“安慰剂”的应对模式的抗抑郁药从“真正的药物”治疗和区分定义的响应模式,模式分析。版权(c) 2006年约翰·威利& Sons有限公司

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
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