精神分裂症的电休克治疗
Electroconvulsive therapy for schizophrenia.
作者信息
Tharyan P, Adams C E
机构信息
Department of Psychiatry, Christian Medical College, Vellore, Tamil Nadu, India, 632001.
出版信息
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2002(2):CD000076. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD000076.
BACKGROUND
Electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) involves the induction of a seizure (fit) for therapeutic purposes by the administration of a variable frequency electrical stimulus shock via electrodes applied to the scalp. The effects of its use in people with schizophrenia are unclear.
OBJECTIVES
To determine whether electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) results in clinically meaningful benefit with regard to global improvement, hospitalisation, changes in mental state, behaviour and functioning for people with schizophrenia, and whether variations in the practical administration of ECT influences outcome.
SEARCH STRATEGY
Electronic searches of Biological Abstracts (1982-1996), EMBASE (1980-1996), MEDLINE (1966-2001), PsycLIT (1974-1996),SCISEARCH (1996) and the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's Register (July 2001) were undertaken. The references of all identified studies were also inspected and authors contacted.
SELECTION CRITERIA
All randomised controlled clinical trials that compared ECT with placebo, 'sham ECT', non-pharmacological interventions and antipsychotics, and different schedules and methods of administration of ECT for people with schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder or chronic mental disorder.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Studies were reliably selected, quality rated and data extracted. For dichotomous data, relative risks (RR) were estimated, with the 95% confidence intervals (CI). Where possible, the number needed to treat statistic (NNT) was calculated. Analysis was by intention-to-treat. Normal continuous data was summated using the weighted mean difference (WMD). Scale data was presented for only those tools that had attained pre-specified levels of quality. Tests of heterogeneity and for publication bias were undertaken.
MAIN RESULTS
This review includes 24 trials with 46 reports. When ECT is compared with placebo or sham ECT, fewer people remain unimproved in the real ECT group (n=400, RR fixed 'not globally improved in the short term' 0.77 CI 0.6 to 0.9, chi-square 13.46 df=8 p=0.1). Removal of the one study with clearly heterogeneous results causes a change in the findings (n=380, 8 RCTs, RR fixed 0.83 CI 0.7 to 1.01), as does removal of a clinically heterogeneous trial (n=370, 8 RCTs, RR fixed 0.74 CI 0.6 to 0.9, chi-square 10.97 df=7 p=0.14). There was a suggestion that ECT resulted in less relapses than sham ECT (n=47, 2 RCTs, RR fixed 0.26 CI 0.03 to 2.2), and a greater likelihood of being discharged from hospital (n=98, 1 RCT, RR fixed 0.59, CI 0.34 to 1.01). There is no evidence that this early advantage for ECT is maintained over the medium to long term. People treated with ECT did not drop out of treatment earlier than those treated with sham ECT (n=495, 14 RCTs, RR fixed 0.71 CI 0.33 to 1.52). Very limited data indicated that visual memory might decline after ECT compared with sham ECT (n=24, 1 RCT, WMD -14.0 CI -23 to -5); the results of verbal memory tests were equivocal. When ECT is directly compared with antipsychotic drug treatment (total n=419, 8 RCTs), results favour the medication group (n=175, 3 RCTs, RR fixed 'not improved at the end of ECT course' 2.18 CI 1.3 to 3.6). One small study suggested more memory impairment after a course of ECT combined with antipsychotics than with antipsychotics alone (n=20, MD serial numbers and picture recall -4.90 CI -0. 8 to -9), though this proved transient. When continuation ECT was added to antipsychotic drugs, the combination was superior to the use of antipsychotics alone (n=30, WMD Global Assessment of Functioning 19.1 CI 9.7 to 28.5), or CECT alone (n=30, WMD -20.3 CI -11.5 to -29.1). Unilateral and bilateral ECT were equally effective in terms of global improvement (n=78, 2 RCTs, RR fixed 'not improved at end of course of ECT' 0.79 CI 0.5 to 1.4). One trial showed a significant advantage for 20 treatments over 12 treatments for numbers globally improved at the end of the ECT course (n=43, RR fixed 2.53 CI 1.1 to 5.7).
REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: There is no evidence to clearly refute the use of ECT for people with schizophrenia. There is some limited evidence to support its use, particularly combined with antipsychotic drugs for those with schizophrenia who show limited response to medication alone. The research base for the use of ECT in people with schizophrenia is growing but, even after more than five decades of clinical use, is still inadequate.
背景
电休克疗法(ECT)是通过将可变频率的电刺激施加于头皮电极来诱发癫痫发作以达到治疗目的。其在精神分裂症患者中的应用效果尚不清楚。
目的
确定电休克疗法(ECT)对于精神分裂症患者在整体改善、住院情况、精神状态、行为及功能改变方面是否能带来具有临床意义的益处,以及ECT实际应用中的差异是否会影响治疗结果。
检索策略
对生物摘要数据库(1982 - 1996年)、EMBASE数据库(1980 - 1996年)、MEDLINE数据库(1966 - 2001年)、心理学文摘数据库(1974 - 1996年)、科学引文索引数据库(1996年)以及Cochrane精神分裂症研究组注册库(2001年7月)进行了电子检索。同时查阅了所有已识别研究的参考文献并与作者取得联系。
选择标准
所有比较ECT与安慰剂、“假ECT”、非药物干预措施及抗精神病药物,以及针对精神分裂症、分裂情感性障碍或慢性精神障碍患者采用不同ECT给药方案和方法的随机对照临床试验。
数据收集与分析
对研究进行可靠选择、质量评分并提取数据。对于二分数据,估计相对风险(RR)及95%置信区间(CI)。尽可能计算需治疗人数(NNT)统计量。采用意向性分析。对于正态连续数据,使用加权平均差(WMD)进行汇总。仅针对达到预先设定质量水平的工具呈现量表数据。进行异质性检验和发表偏倚检验。
主要结果
本综述纳入24项试验,共46篇报告。将ECT与安慰剂或假ECT进行比较时,ECT实际治疗组中未改善的人数较少(n = 400,RR固定效应模型“短期内未整体改善”为0.77,CI为0.6至0.9,卡方值13.46,自由度df = 8,p = 0.1)。剔除一项结果明显异质性的研究后结果有所变化(n = 380,8项随机对照试验,RR固定效应模型0.83,CI为0.7至1.01),剔除一项临床异质性试验后同样如此(n = 370,8项随机对照试验,RR固定效应模型0.74,CI为0.6至0.9,卡方值10.97,自由度df = 7,p = 0.14)。有迹象表明ECT导致的复发少于假ECT(n = 47,2项随机对照试验,RR固定效应模型0.26,CI为0.03至2.2),且出院可能性更大(n = 98,1项随机对照试验,RR固定效应模型0.59,CI为0.34至1.01)。但没有证据表明ECT的这种早期优势在中长期能够持续。接受ECT治疗的患者退出治疗的时间并不比接受假ECT治疗的患者早(n = 495,14项随机对照试验,RR固定效应模型0.71,CI为0.33至1.52)。非常有限的数据表明,与假ECT相比,ECT后视觉记忆可能会下降(n = 24,1项随机对照试验,WMD - 14.0,CI为 - 23至 - 5);言语记忆测试结果不明确。当将ECT与抗精神病药物治疗直接比较时(共n = 419,8项随机对照试验),结果有利于药物治疗组(n = 175,3项随机对照试验,RR固定效应模型“ECT疗程结束时未改善”为2.18,CI为1.3至3.6)。一项小型研究表明,ECT联合抗精神病药物治疗后比单纯使用抗精神病药物出现更多记忆损害(n = 20,MD序列号和图片回忆 - 4.90,CI为 - 0.8至 - 9),不过这被证明是短暂的。当在抗精神病药物基础上加用维持性ECT时,联合治疗优于单纯使用抗精神病药物(n = 30,WMD功能总体评估为19.1,CI为9.7至28.5),或优于单纯使用连续性ECT(n = 30,WMD - 20.3,CI为 - 11.5至 - 29.1)。就整体改善而言,单侧ECT和双侧ECT同样有效(n = 78,2项随机对照试验,RR固定效应模型“ECT疗程结束时未改善”为0.79,CI为0.5至1.4)。一项试验表明,在ECT疗程结束时,接受20次治疗比12次治疗在整体改善人数方面具有显著优势(n = 43,RR固定效应模型2.53,CI为1.1至5.7)。
综述作者结论
没有证据明确反驳ECT在精神分裂症患者中的应用。有一些有限的证据支持其应用,特别是对于那些单独使用药物反应有限的精神分裂症患者,联合抗精神病药物使用时。ECT在精神分裂症患者中的研究基础正在不断扩大,但即使经过五十多年的临床应用,仍然不够充分。