• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

[基层医疗中惊恐障碍治疗方案的树状决策分析]

[Tree decision analysis of the therapeutic alternatives for Panic Disorders in Primary Care].

作者信息

Navarro-Mateu Fernando, Garriga-Puerto Ascensión, Sánchez-Sánchez Juan Antonio

机构信息

Unidad de Docencia, Servicio Murciano de Salud, Murcia, España.

出版信息

Aten Primaria. 2010 Feb;42(2):86-94. doi: 10.1016/j.aprim.2009.05.003. Epub 2009 Jul 24.

DOI:10.1016/j.aprim.2009.05.003
PMID:19632004
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7022091/
Abstract

AIMS

To analyse the different therapeutic alternatives for Panic Disorders to make it easier to make collaborative treatment decisions between patients and doctors in a Primary Care setting.

DESIGN

Quantitative analysis by a decision tree.

DATA SOURCES

Time period reviewed; 1990-2008 in Med-line, Embase, Cochrane-plus Library and Tripdatabase. Terms used "panic disorder", "psychotherapy" and "drug therapy".

METHODS

I) A decision tree was prepared with only one therapeutic option in each arm; II) The same procedure with two sequential therapeutic options; III) Sensitivity analysis to test the robustness of the model.

STUDY SELECTION

Evidence summary, systematic reviews, meta-analysis and clinical guidelines.

RESULTS

Cognitive-Behavioural Therapy (CBT) obtains the highest usefulness (UME=0.58), followed by the Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRI) (UME=0.53) and by the tricyclic antidepressants (UME=0.44). CBT followed by SSRI is the therapeutic sequence with the highest usefulness (0.62). The sensitivity analysis suggests the model is not robust enough.

CONCLUSIONS

The CBT in monotherapy or followed by SSRI in a sequential strategy would be the options with the highest usefulness. The results are not robust enough because they can clearly vary with changes in the most important variables in a reasonable range.

摘要

目的

分析恐慌症的不同治疗选择,以便在初级保健环境中患者和医生更容易做出联合治疗决策。

设计

通过决策树进行定量分析。

数据来源

回顾的时间段;1990 - 2008年见于医学在线数据库、荷兰医学文摘数据库、考科蓝图书馆和循证医学数据库。使用的检索词为“恐慌症”、“心理治疗”和“药物治疗”。

方法

I)准备一个决策树,每个分支只有一种治疗选择;II)对两个连续治疗选择采用相同程序;III)进行敏感性分析以测试模型的稳健性。

研究选择

证据总结、系统评价、荟萃分析和临床指南。

结果

认知行为疗法(CBT)效用最高(效用均值UME = 0.58),其次是选择性5-羟色胺再摄取抑制剂(SSRI)(UME = 0.53)和三环类抗抑郁药(UME = 0.44)。先采用CBT然后使用SSRI是效用最高的治疗顺序(0.62)。敏感性分析表明该模型不够稳健。

结论

单一疗法的CBT或之后采用顺序策略使用SSRI将是效用最高的选择。结果不够稳健,因为在合理范围内随着最重要变量的变化它们可能会明显不同。

相似文献

1
[Tree decision analysis of the therapeutic alternatives for Panic Disorders in Primary Care].[基层医疗中惊恐障碍治疗方案的树状决策分析]
Aten Primaria. 2010 Feb;42(2):86-94. doi: 10.1016/j.aprim.2009.05.003. Epub 2009 Jul 24.
2
[Management of panic disorder in the elderly].[老年惊恐障碍的管理]
Geriatr Psychol Neuropsychiatr Vieil. 2020 Sep 1;18(3):295-304. doi: 10.1684/pnv.2020.0878.
3
International Study of Expert Judgement on Therapeutic Use of Benzodiazepines and Other Psychotherapeutic Medications: V. Treatment strategies in panic disorder, 1992-1997.苯二氮䓬类药物及其他心理治疗药物治疗用途专家判断的国际研究:V. 惊恐障碍的治疗策略,1992 - 1997年
J Clin Psychopharmacol. 1998 Dec;18(6 Suppl 2):27S-31S. doi: 10.1097/00004714-199812001-00006.
4
The effect of Korean-group cognitive behavioural therapy among patients with panic disorder in clinic settings.韩国团体认知行为疗法对临床环境中惊恐障碍患者的疗效。
J Psychiatr Ment Health Nurs. 2017 Feb;24(1):28-40. doi: 10.1111/jpm.12337. Epub 2016 Oct 24.
5
[The role of psychotherapy in managing panic disorder].[心理治疗在惊恐障碍管理中的作用]
Encephale. 1996 Dec;22 Spec No 5:54-60.
6
A randomized effectiveness trial of cognitive-behavioral therapy and medication for primary care panic disorder.一项针对初级保健惊恐障碍的认知行为疗法与药物治疗的随机疗效试验。
Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2005 Mar;62(3):290-8. doi: 10.1001/archpsyc.62.3.290.
7
Which psychotherapy is effective in panic disorder? And which delivery formats are supported by the evidence? Study protocol for two systematic reviews and network meta-analyses.哪种心理疗法对惊恐障碍有效?哪些治疗形式有证据支持?两项系统评价和网状Meta分析的研究方案。
BMJ Open. 2020 Dec 28;10(12):e038909. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-038909.
8
Treatments for panic disorder.惊恐障碍的治疗方法。
J Clin Psychiatry. 1992 Mar;53 Suppl:14-9.
9
Treatment of panic disorder.惊恐障碍的治疗。
Am Fam Physician. 2005 Feb 15;71(4):733-9.
10
Does the addition of cognitive behavioral therapy improve panic disorder treatment outcome relative to medication alone in the primary-care setting?在初级保健环境中,相对于单纯药物治疗,添加认知行为疗法是否能改善惊恐障碍的治疗效果?
Psychol Med. 2005 Nov;35(11):1645-54. doi: 10.1017/S003329170500557X.

本文引用的文献

1
Brief intervention for anxiety in primary care patients.基层医疗患者焦虑症的简短干预
J Am Board Fam Med. 2009 Mar-Apr;22(2):175-86. doi: 10.3122/jabfm.2009.02.080078.
2
Tips for teachers of evidence-based medicine: making sense of decision analysis using a decision tree.循证医学教师指南:使用决策树理解决策分析。
J Gen Intern Med. 2009 May;24(5):642-8. doi: 10.1007/s11606-009-0918-8. Epub 2009 Feb 27.
3
Combined psychotherapy plus benzodiazepines for panic disorder.联合心理治疗与苯二氮䓬类药物治疗惊恐障碍。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2009 Jan 21(1):CD005335. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD005335.pub2.
4
Psychotherapy plus antidepressant for panic disorder with or without agoraphobia: systematic review.心理治疗加抗抑郁药治疗伴或不伴广场恐惧症的惊恐障碍:系统评价
Br J Psychiatry. 2006 Apr;188:305-12. doi: 10.1192/bjp.188.4.305.
5
[Study of use of psychiatric drugs in primary care].[基层医疗中精神科药物的使用研究]
Aten Primaria. 2005 Sep 30;36(5):239-45. doi: 10.1157/13079144.
6
A meta-analysis of the efficacy of psycho- and pharmacotherapy in panic disorder with and without agoraphobia.对伴有或不伴有广场恐惧症的惊恐障碍中心理治疗和药物治疗疗效的荟萃分析。
J Affect Disord. 2005 Sep;88(1):27-45. doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2005.05.003.
7
Cost effectiveness of acute imipramine therapy versus two imipramine maintenance treatment regimens for panic disorder.
Pharmacoeconomics. 2000 Oct;18(4):383-91. doi: 10.2165/00019053-200018040-00006.
8
Individualizing treatment decisions. The likelihood of being helped or harmed.个体化治疗决策。获益或受损的可能性。
Eval Health Prof. 2002 Jun;25(2):210-24. doi: 10.1177/016327870202500206.
9
Shared decision making in hypertension: the impact of patient preferences on treatment choice.高血压治疗中的共同决策:患者偏好对治疗选择的影响。
Fam Pract. 2001 Jun;18(3):309-13. doi: 10.1093/fampra/18.3.309.
10
The impact of patients' preferences on the treatment of atrial fibrillation: observational study of patient based decision analysis.患者偏好对房颤治疗的影响:基于患者的决策分析观察性研究
BMJ. 2000 May 20;320(7246):1380-4. doi: 10.1136/bmj.320.7246.1380.