...
首页> 外文期刊>Schizophrenia research >Antipsychotic switching versus augmentation among early non-responders to risperidone or olanzapine in acute-phase schizophrenia
【24h】

Antipsychotic switching versus augmentation among early non-responders to risperidone or olanzapine in acute-phase schizophrenia

机译:急性期精神分裂症早期对利培酮或奥氮平无反应的抗精神病药转换与增强

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Purpose: We examined whether augmentation with olanzapine would be superior to switching to olanzapine among early non-responders (ENRs) to risperidone, and whether augmentation with risperidone would be superior to switching to risperidone among ENRs to olanzapine.We performed a rater-blinded, randomized clinical trial at psychiatric emergency sites. Eligible patients were newly admitted patients with acute schizophrenia. ENRs to the initial antipsychotic (Clinical Global Impressions-Improvement Scale: e. 4 at 2. weeks) were allocated to receive either augmentation with or switching to the other antipsychotic (RIS. +. OLZ vs. RIS-OLZ; OLZ. +. RIS vs. OLZ-RIS). Results: Sixty patients who completed 2. weeks of risperidone treatment were divided into 33 early responders (RIS-ER) and 27 ENRs (RIS. +. OLZ, n. =. 14; RIS-OLZ, n. =. 13). Although time to treatment discontinuation for any cause was significantly shorter in RIS. +. OLZ group (54.1. days [95% confidence interval, 41.3-67.0]) than in RIS-ER group (68.7 [61.2-76.2]; P=. 0.050), it was not significantly shorter in RIS-OLZ group (58.5 [43.1-73.9]) than in RIS-ER group (P=. 0.19). Sixty patients who completed 2. weeks of olanzapine treatment were divided into 36 early responders (OLZ-ER) and 24 ENRs (OLZ. +. RIS, n. =. 11; OLZ-RIS, n. =. 13). Although time to treatment discontinuation for any cause was significantly shorter in OLZ-RIS group (56.1. days [40.7-71.5]) than in OLZ-ER group (74.9 [68.5-81.3]; P=. 0.008), it was not significantly shorter in OLZ. +. RIS group (64.6 [49.6-79.6]) than in OLZ-ER group (P=. 0.20). Conclusion: Despite the lack of pharmacokinetic investigation of dose adequacy in this study, it is possible that switching to olanzapine among ENRs to risperidone might have a small advantage over augmentation with olanzapine, while augmentation with risperidone might have a small advantage over switching to risperidone among ENRs to olanzapine. Further research is required before it would be appropriate to modify routine practice in the direction of these findings.
机译:目的:我们研究了在早期无反应者(ENR)中使用奥氮平增强是否优于在使用利培酮的情况下改用奥氮平,在奥沙平的ENR中是否使用利培酮增强的治疗是否优于在利多酮的情况下改用利培酮。精神科急诊地点的随机临床试验。符合条件的患者是新入院的急性精神分裂症患者。分配最初抗精神病药物的ENR(临床总体印象-改善量表:2周时为4。)接受另一种抗精神病药物的增强治疗或改用另一种抗精神病药物(RIS。+。OLZ vs. RIS-OLZ; OLZ。+。 RIS与OLZ-RIS)。结果:60名完成利培酮治疗2周的患者被分为33个早期应答者(RIS-ER)和27个ENR(RIS。+。OLZ,n = 14; RIS-OLZ,n。= 13)。尽管由于任何原因而中断治疗的时间在RIS中明显缩短了。 +。 OLZ组(54.1。天[95%置信区间,41.3-67.0])比RIS-ER组(68.7 [61.2-76.2]; P = .0.050)短,但RIS-OLZ组(58.5 [ [43.1-73.9])比RIS-ER组高(P = .0.19)。将完成奥氮平治疗2周的60例患者分为36个早期反应者(OLZ-ER)和24个ENR(OLZ。+。RIS,n = 11; OLZ-RIS,n。= 13)。尽管OLZ-RIS组(56.1。天[40.7-71.5])因任何原因停止治疗的时间明显短于OLZ-ER组(74.9 [68.5-81.3]; P = .0.008),但不显着在OLZ中更短。 +。 RIS组(64.6 [49.6-79.6])比OLZ-ER组(P = 0.20)。结论:尽管在这项研究中未进行足够剂量的药代动力学研究,但在ENR中使用奥氮平替代利培酮可能比用奥氮平增强的益处小,而在使用利培酮增强的患者中选择利培酮的益处较小。奥氮平的ENR。在根据这些发现改变常规做法之前,需要进行进一步的研究。

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