| 引用本文:吕学玉1，冯帆1，丰云舒1，李艳2，杨冬蓉2，都弘3，陈建荣3，王国强4，陈新宇4，王健1，洪兰1，张锦花1，李桂侠1，杜辉1，王处渊1，汪卫东1.中医心理低阻抗意念导入疗法(TIP技术)治疗抑郁症的临床疗效研究:一项多中心、随机对照试验[J].世界中医药,2019,(12):. |
|
| 中医心理低阻抗意念导入疗法(TIP技术)治疗抑郁症的临床疗效研究:一项多中心、随机对照试验 |
| Low Resistance State Thought Induction Psychotherapy(TIP)for Depression:a Multicenter Randomized Controlled Study |
| 投稿时间：2019-02-17 |
| DOI：10.3969/j.issn.1673-7202.2019.12.069 |
| 中文关键词: 低阻抗意念导入疗法 认知行为疗法 抑郁症 多中心 随机对照 |
| English Keywords:TIP CBT Depression Multicenter Randomized control |
| 基金项目:“十二五”国家科技支撑计划(2014BAI10B07)——病证结合治疗抑郁症的临床评价研究;国家自然科学基金项目(81603673)——中医松静功纠正抑郁症过度自我觉知对相关脑网络的影响 |
|
| 摘要点击次数: 402 |
| 全文下载次数: 453 |
| 中文摘要: |
| 目的:比较中医心理TIP技术与西方CBT技术干预抑郁症疗效,观察长期疗效;方法:采用多中心随机对照试验,选取2015年1月至2017年9月的抑郁症患者225例作为研究对象,随机分为A、B、C 3组,分别接受TIP、CBT、电针+中药+TIP治疗,干预12周,随访1年。评估工具为汉密尔顿抑郁量表(HAMD)、汉密尔顿焦虑量表(HAMA)、贝克抑郁量表(BDI),在治疗前、治疗4、8、12周及随访1年时测评,每组脱落10例,共有195例患者完成试验。结果:随着治疗周期的增长,3组治疗有效率均在稳步提升。并且在第12周达到最高有效率。相对来看,综合疗法的治疗有效率最高为80.8%,而TIP疗法,CBT疗法在第12周的治疗有效率分别是72.9%和72.3%,但三者差异无统计学意义(χ2=4.941,P=0.051);随访1年时,C组复发率最高,32.5%,显著高于A组(15%),B组(10.3%),差异有统计学意义(χ2=6.774,P=0.034);结论:该部分研究显示A组与C组疗效相当,长期疗效优于C组。 |
| English Summary: |
| To compare the clinical efficacy of the TIP and CBT, and to observe the long-term effect.Methods:Multicenter randomized controlled trial was designed.225 patients with depression from January 2015 to September 2017 were enrolled and randomized into 3 groups, who received TIP, CBT and electroacupuncture+Chinese herbal medicine+TIP treatment respectively.The intervention period was 12 weeks and follow-up in 1 year.The assessment tools were the Hamilton Depression Scale(HAMD), the Hamilton Anxiety Scale(HAMA), and the Baker Depression Scale(BDI).They were measured before treatment, at 4, 8, 12 weeks of treatment, and at 1 year of follow-up.10 cases dropped in each group.A total of 195 patients completed the trial.Results:With the increase of the treatment cycle, the treatment efficiency of the 3 groups was steadily improved, and reached the highest in the 12th week.In contrast, the maximum effective rate of comprehensive therapy was 80.8%, while the effective rates of TIP therapy and CBT therapy at week 12 were 72.9% and 72.3%, respectively, but the difference between the 3 groups was not statistically significant(χ2=4.941, P=0.051); at 1 year of follow-up, the recurrence rate was 32.5%, the highest in the CBT group, which was significantly higher than that in the TIP group(15%)and the comprehensive group(10.3%), and the difference was statistically significant(χ2=6.774, P=0.034).Conclusion:This part of the study shows that the TIP group is equivalent to the CBT group, and the long-term effect is better than the CBT group. |
| 查看全文 查看/发表评论 下载PDF阅读器 |
|
|
|
