Chinese General Practice ›› 2022, Vol. 25 ›› Issue (05): 595-602.DOI: 10.12114/j.issn.1007-9572.2021.01.403
Special Issue: 精神卫生最新文章合集
• Original Research • Previous Articles Next Articles
The Efficacy of Whole Course Management in Patients with Schizophrenia
1.Shihezi University School of Medicine,Shihezi 832008,China
2.Department of Rehabilitation Psychiatry,First Affiliated Hospital,Shihezi University,School of Medicine,Shihezi 832008,China
*Corresponding author:ZHANG Guiqing,Chief physician,Professor;E-mail:firstli@126.com
Received:
2021-07-22
Revised:
2021-09-14
Published:
2022-02-15
Online:
2022-01-29
通讯作者:
张桂青
基金资助:
CLC Number:
ZULAYETI•Tuerxun, ZHANG Guiqing, YAO Yongkun, LU Keke.
The Efficacy of Whole Course Management in Patients with Schizophrenia [J]. Chinese General Practice, 2022, 25(05): 595-602.
Add to citation manager EndNote|Ris|BibTeX
URL: https://www.chinagp.net/EN/10.12114/j.issn.1007-9572.2021.01.403
组别 | 例数 | 性别(男/女) | 年龄(![]() | 病程(![]() | 住院天数(![]() | 住院次数〔M(P25,P75),次〕 | 用药种类〔M(P25,P75),种〕 | 药物不良反应种类〔M(P25,P75),种〕 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
对照组 | 62 | 24/38 | 37.6±10.6 | 56.5±32.2 | 165.7±104.8 | 3(1,5) | 3(2,4) | 1(0,2) |
研究组 | 62 | 33/29 | 33.9±11.5 | 54.2±32.0 | 184.9±117.3 | 2(1,4) | 3(2,4) | 1(0,2) |
检验统计量值 | 2.630a | -1.902b | -0.413b | 0.963b | -0.537 | -0.321 | -0.121 | |
P值 | 0.106 | 0.060 | 0.688 | 0.338 | 0.591 | 0.748 | 0.904 |
Table 1 Comparison of demographic data of schizophrenia patients in study group and control group
组别 | 例数 | 性别(男/女) | 年龄(![]() | 病程(![]() | 住院天数(![]() | 住院次数〔M(P25,P75),次〕 | 用药种类〔M(P25,P75),种〕 | 药物不良反应种类〔M(P25,P75),种〕 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
对照组 | 62 | 24/38 | 37.6±10.6 | 56.5±32.2 | 165.7±104.8 | 3(1,5) | 3(2,4) | 1(0,2) |
研究组 | 62 | 33/29 | 33.9±11.5 | 54.2±32.0 | 184.9±117.3 | 2(1,4) | 3(2,4) | 1(0,2) |
检验统计量值 | 2.630a | -1.902b | -0.413b | 0.963b | -0.537 | -0.321 | -0.121 | |
P值 | 0.106 | 0.060 | 0.688 | 0.338 | 0.591 | 0.748 | 0.904 |
组别 | 例数 | PANSS总分 | 阳性症状量表评分 | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
干预前 | 入组后3个月 | 入组后6个月 | 入组后12个月 | 干预前 | 入组后3个月 | 入组后6个月 | 入组后12个月 | ||
对照组 | 62 | 80.15±12.43 | 52.19±11.07a | 47.71±9.65ab | 48.90±13.67a | 21.29±6.80 | 10.42±3.55a | 8.73±3.46a | 9.68±4.99a |
研究组 | 62 | 80.63±10.90 | 51.48±7.99a | 43.98±8.68abd | 41.23±11.87abd | 22.08±5.21 | 9.63±2.66a | 7.81±2.24a | 8.58±4.41a |
F值 | F时间=393.642,F组别=4.067,F交互=3.473 | F时间=219.130,F组别=1.006,F交互=1.542 | |||||||
P值 | P时间<0.001,P组别=0.046,P交互=0.018 | P时间<0.001,P组别=0.318,P交互=0.417 |
Table 2 Comparison of PANSS scores between two groups before and after intervention
组别 | 例数 | PANSS总分 | 阳性症状量表评分 | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
干预前 | 入组后3个月 | 入组后6个月 | 入组后12个月 | 干预前 | 入组后3个月 | 入组后6个月 | 入组后12个月 | ||
对照组 | 62 | 80.15±12.43 | 52.19±11.07a | 47.71±9.65ab | 48.90±13.67a | 21.29±6.80 | 10.42±3.55a | 8.73±3.46a | 9.68±4.99a |
研究组 | 62 | 80.63±10.90 | 51.48±7.99a | 43.98±8.68abd | 41.23±11.87abd | 22.08±5.21 | 9.63±2.66a | 7.81±2.24a | 8.58±4.41a |
F值 | F时间=393.642,F组别=4.067,F交互=3.473 | F时间=219.130,F组别=1.006,F交互=1.542 | |||||||
P值 | P时间<0.001,P组别=0.046,P交互=0.018 | P时间<0.001,P组别=0.318,P交互=0.417 |
组别 | 例数 | SDSS总分 | ADL总分 | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
干预前 | 入组后3个月 | 入组后6个月 | 入组后12个月 | 干预前 | 入组后3个月 | 入组后6个月 | 入组后12个月 | ||
对照组 | 62 | 14.08±4.21 | 9.02±3.84a | 7.42±3.79ab | 7.52±4.54ab | 21.98±5.42 | 17.40±3.37a | 16.60±2.53ab | 16.92±2.97a |
研究组 | 62 | 12.79±4.04 | 8.05±3.41a | 5.55±3.69abd | 3.95±4.09abcd | 20.68±4.05 | 17.19±2.86a | 16.10±1.93ab | 15.13±2.36abcd |
F值 | F时间=94.441,F组别=13.246,F交互=3.863 | F时间=59.260,F组别=4.299,F交互=4.124 | |||||||
P值 | P时间<0.001,P组别<0.001,P交互=0.011 | P时间<0.001,P组别=0.040,P交互=0.008 |
Table 3 Comparison of SDSS and ADL scores between two groups before and after intervention
组别 | 例数 | SDSS总分 | ADL总分 | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
干预前 | 入组后3个月 | 入组后6个月 | 入组后12个月 | 干预前 | 入组后3个月 | 入组后6个月 | 入组后12个月 | ||
对照组 | 62 | 14.08±4.21 | 9.02±3.84a | 7.42±3.79ab | 7.52±4.54ab | 21.98±5.42 | 17.40±3.37a | 16.60±2.53ab | 16.92±2.97a |
研究组 | 62 | 12.79±4.04 | 8.05±3.41a | 5.55±3.69abd | 3.95±4.09abcd | 20.68±4.05 | 17.19±2.86a | 16.10±1.93ab | 15.13±2.36abcd |
F值 | F时间=94.441,F组别=13.246,F交互=3.863 | F时间=59.260,F组别=4.299,F交互=4.124 | |||||||
P值 | P时间<0.001,P组别<0.001,P交互=0.011 | P时间<0.001,P组别=0.040,P交互=0.008 |
组别 | 例数 | 差 | 中等 | 好 |
---|---|---|---|---|
对照组 | 45 | 45(100.0) | 0 | 0 |
研究组 | 40 | 38(95.0) | 1(2.5) | 1(2.5) |
Z值 | -1.509 | |||
P值 | 0.131 |
Table 4 Comparison of medication adherence between two groups before intervention
组别 | 例数 | 差 | 中等 | 好 |
---|---|---|---|---|
对照组 | 45 | 45(100.0) | 0 | 0 |
研究组 | 40 | 38(95.0) | 1(2.5) | 1(2.5) |
Z值 | -1.509 | |||
P值 | 0.131 |
组别 | 例数 | 差 | 中等 | 好 |
---|---|---|---|---|
对照组 | 54 | 29(53.7) | 12(22.2) | 13(24.1) |
研究组 | 48 | 12(25.0) | 16(33.3) | 20(41.7) |
Z值 | -2.603 | |||
P值 | 0.006 |
Table 5 Comparison of medication compliance between the two groups at 3 months after discharge
组别 | 例数 | 差 | 中等 | 好 |
---|---|---|---|---|
对照组 | 54 | 29(53.7) | 12(22.2) | 13(24.1) |
研究组 | 48 | 12(25.0) | 16(33.3) | 20(41.7) |
Z值 | -2.603 | |||
P值 | 0.006 |
组别 | 例数 | 差 | 中等 | 好 |
---|---|---|---|---|
对照组 | 53 | 39(73.6) | 10(18.9) | 4(7.5) |
研究组 | 47 | 19(40.4) | 13(27.7) | 15(31.9) |
Z值 | -3.568 | |||
P值 | <0.001 |
Table 6 Comparison of medication compliance between the two groups at 6 months after discharge
组别 | 例数 | 差 | 中等 | 好 |
---|---|---|---|---|
对照组 | 53 | 39(73.6) | 10(18.9) | 4(7.5) |
研究组 | 47 | 19(40.4) | 13(27.7) | 15(31.9) |
Z值 | -3.568 | |||
P值 | <0.001 |
组别 | 例数 | 差 | 中等 | 好 |
---|---|---|---|---|
对照组 | 52 | 43(82.7) | 4(7.7) | 5(9.6) |
研究组 | 46 | 16(34.8) | 12(26.1) | 18(39.1) |
Z值 | -4.815 | |||
P值 | <0.001 |
Table 7 Comparison of medication compliance between the two groups at 12 months after discharge
组别 | 例数 | 差 | 中等 | 好 |
---|---|---|---|---|
对照组 | 52 | 43(82.7) | 4(7.7) | 5(9.6) |
研究组 | 46 | 16(34.8) | 12(26.1) | 18(39.1) |
Z值 | -4.815 | |||
P值 | <0.001 |
组别 | 例数 | 未复发 | 复发 |
---|---|---|---|
对照组 | 54 | 44(81.5) | 10(18.5) |
研究组 | 49 | 43(87.8) | 6(12.2) |
χ2值 | 0.771 | ||
P值 | 0.380 |
Table 8 Comparison of recurrence rate between two groups within 1-year follow-up after discharge
组别 | 例数 | 未复发 | 复发 |
---|---|---|---|
对照组 | 54 | 44(81.5) | 10(18.5) |
研究组 | 49 | 43(87.8) | 6(12.2) |
χ2值 | 0.771 | ||
P值 | 0.380 |
[1] | THORNICROFT G. The concept of case management for long-term mental illness[J]. Int Rev Psychiatry,1991,3(1):125-132. DOI:10.3109/09540269109067527. |
[2] | 汪庆华. 抑郁症患者全病程管理模式的效果研究[J]. 中医药管理杂志,2015,23(22):49-51. DOI:10.16690/j.cnki.1007-9203.2015.22.022. |
[3] | 何秀英,陈剑英,吴风云,等. 全程管理模式对出院精神分裂症患者服药依从性的影响[J]. 中国民康医学,2014,26(16):1-4,8. |
[4] | 李鹏辉,王锋锐,王丽辉,等. 个体化全病程管理对精神分裂症患者认知及社会功能的影响研究[J]. 中国医学创新,2017,14(3):31-34. |
[5] | 刘俊彪,吴靖华. 全病程康复指导对首发精神分裂症患者的影响[J]. 中国民康医学,2009,21(13):1554-1555. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1672-0369.2009.13.038. |
[6] | MAS-EXPÓSITO L, AMADOR-CAMPOS J A, GÓMEZ-BENITO J,et al. Clinical case management for patients with schizophrenia with high care needs[J]. Community Ment Health J,2015,51(2):165-170. DOI:10.1007/s10597-014-9741-8. |
[7] | PETERSEN L, JEPPESEN P, THORUP A,et al. A randomised multicentre trial of integrated versus standard treatment for patients with a first episode of psychotic illness[J]. BMJ,2005,331(7517):602. DOI:10.1136/bmj.38565.415000.E01. |
[8] | 李晓慧. 全病程管理模式对偏执型精神分裂症患者依从性及不良心理的影响[J]. 心理月刊,2020,15(20):212-213. DOI:10.19738/j.cnki.psy.2020.20.097. |
[9] | 白志坚. 探析精神卫生全程服务对社区精神分裂症患者的康复作用[J]. 中国处方药,2020,18(5):162-164. |
[10] | 朱磊,黄惠红,王稀琛,等. 应用积极个案管理模式对社区精神分裂症患者精神症状和生活质量的影响[J]. 临床精神医学杂志,2020,30(5):324-327. |
[11] | 叶飞英,余秋容,李菲,等. 全病程个案管理对社区精神分裂症患者康复的影响[J]. 临床心身疾病杂志,2014,20(4):40-42,61. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1672-187X.2014.04.017-0040-04. |
[12] | 胡光涛,李学成,崔建新,等. 军人精神分裂症患者全病程医疗服务管理模式疗效观察[J]. 解放军医学杂志,2011,36(8):863-865. |
[13] | 王士良,陈建玲,钱敏才,等. 社交技能训练治疗残留期精神分裂症的疗效观察[J]. 中国康复,2016,31(5):323-326. |
[14] | 沈涛. 社区精神分裂症患者的用药依从性现况及其影响因素[J]. 健康教育与健康促进,2020,15(3):250-252. DOI:10.16117/j.cnki.31-1974/r.202003010. |
[15] | 司天梅. 中国精神分裂症的研究现状与展望[J]. 中华精神科杂志,2015,48(3):131-135. DOI:10.3760/cma.j.issn.1006-7884.2015.03.003. |
[16] | KEEPERS G A, FOCHTMANN L J, ANZIA J M,et al. The American psychiatric association practice guideline for the treatment of patients with schizophrenia[J]. Am J Psychiatry,2020,177(9):868-872. DOI:10.1176/appi.ajp.2020.177901. |
[17] | 袁大伟,徐燕,李瑾. 全病程管理对精神分裂症患者康复效果的研究[J]. 中国民康医学,2015,27(3):80-81. |
[18] | 陈松华,贾伟,邱永斌,等. 全病程病案管理对高血压患者的作用[J]. 中国实用神经疾病杂志,2014,17(23):93-95. |
[19] | 肖菁. 全病程管理模式对糖尿病患者血糖控制及用药依从性的影响[J]. 实用临床护理学电子杂志,2019,4(23):177-178. |
[20] | 张芸,王岩梅. 全病程管理模式在临床上的应用现状及展望[J]. 解放军预防医学杂志,2016,34(S2):235. DOI:10.13704/j.cnki.jyyx.2016.s2.214. |
[21] | 丁淑艳,李雪芳,诸雅芳,等. 双因素视角下个案管理社区干预对精神分裂症患者的效果[J]. 江苏预防医学,2020,31(5):508-510,515. DOI:10.13668/j.issn.1006-9070.2020.05.011. |
[22] | 刘云,刘锟,杨荣春,等. 社区个案管理对精神分裂症患者疗效的12个月随访:一项单盲随机对照研究[J]. 中国临床心理学杂志,2020,28(2):423-427. DOI:10.16128/j.cnki.1005-3611.2020.02.043. |
[23] | 张开国,黄燕虹. 精神分裂症患者未治疗期及早期干预[J]. 国际精神病学杂志,2019,46(3):396-399. DOI:10.13479/j.cnki.jip.2019.03.004. |
[24] | 罗红叶,冯启明,李宏亨,等. 健康教育对精神分裂症康复效果的系统评价[J]. 中国全科医学,2010,13(7):764-767. |
[25] | 张健,江芮. 生活技能训练对精神分裂症缓解期患者日常生活能力的影响[J]. 医学信息,2018,31(3):118-119,122. |
[26] | 孟月兰,朱青青,高松寅. 康复治疗在精神分裂症康复期患者中的应用评价[J]. 中外医疗,2015,34(13):17-18. DOI:10.16662/j.cnki.1674-0742.2015.13.079. |
[27] | 李菲. 全病程个案管理在精神分裂症患者治疗中的应用效果[J]. 中国当代医药,2015,22(19):63-65,69. |
[28] | 孙淑红,裴双义,宋珀槿. 全病程综合干预对精神分裂症患者康复的影响[J]. 中国老年学杂志,2013,33(19):4705-4706. |
[29] | 胡光涛,宋航,王国威,等. 全病程医疗服务模式对军队首发精神分裂症患者2年疗效随访[J]. 西南国防医药,2013,23(4):352-354. |
[30] | 陈宇薇. 住院精神分裂症患者整合治疗模式的建立与疗效评估[D]. 广州:广州医科大学,2017. |
[31] | 徐爱仙,孙得弟. 多维度康复护理联合心理干预在精神分裂症患者中的应用效果[J]. 中国当代医药,2020,27(22):216-218. |
[32] | 靖九江. 让精神分裂症患者重返真实世界[N]. 中国医药报,2016-04-29(3). |
[1] | YAO Yuzhong, MA Xiaojun, SONG Huan, ZHONG Yu. The Management Effect of Diabetes "1358 model" on Community Diabetes Patients Based on "Precision Management Combining General Care and Specialty Care" [J]. Chinese General Practice, 2023, 26(34): 4308-4314. |
[2] | ZHANG Siyu, ZHOU Yuqiu, DU Xiaohui, WANG Zhengjun. Advances in Duration of Untreated Psychosis and Its Early Intervention [J]. Chinese General Practice, 2023, 26(33): 4110-4117. |
[3] | LI Qian, ZHANG Yunshu, YAN Baoping, WANG Jian, MA Yanjuan, WANG Yuan, QIN Yingjie, NA Long, REN Zhiyong, SUN Junwei, DENG Huaili, MA Hongjun, QU Xuehui, ZHOU Nan, SI Tianmei. Efficacy and Safety of Risperidone Microspheres for Injection (Ⅱ) in the Treatment of Patients with Acute Schizophrenia [J]. Chinese General Practice, 2023, 26(32): 4007-4012. |
[4] | YAO Junjie, SHANG Qiangqiang, WANG Yufeng, LI Jiahui, LIU Chang, PANG Tingting. Wearable Inertial Sensors-based Efficacy Evaluation of Comprehensive Traditional Chinese Medicine Therapy for Lumbar Disc Herniation Due to Qi-stagnation and Blood-stasis [J]. Chinese General Practice, 2023, 26(27): 3450-3455. |
[5] | LIU Minghao, WANG Pan, GAO Lijian, XU Shuqing, WANG Huanhuan, ZHAO Guangxian, CHEN Jue, QIAO Shubin, XU Bo, YUAN Jinqing. Feasibility, Safety and Timing of Secondary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention via Distal Transradial Artery Approach [J]. Chinese General Practice, 2023, 26(27): 3366-3372. |
[6] | LU Bin, XIANG Chong, YUAN Xuesong, CAI Gaojun, WEI Wenfeng, YAN Yongmin. Effectiveness, Safety and Satisfaction of Distal Transradial Artery Approach in Cerebral Angiography [J]. Chinese General Practice, 2023, 26(27): 3378-3382. |
[7] | MA Rui, WANG Yu, LI Yuxin, WANG Zhengjun, ZHOU Yuqiu. Application of Cognitive Interviewing in the Development of a Help-seeking Motivation Scale for Patients with Schizophrenia [J]. Chinese General Practice, 2023, 26(23): 2907-2911. |
[8] | SUN Yujing, ZHANG Jing, YU Hong, ZHOU Yuqiu, JIANG Wenlong, JIA Yannan. Effect of Childhood Trauma on Aggressive Behavior in Stable Schizophrenia Patients: the Chain Mediating Effect of Self-esteem and Resilience [J]. Chinese General Practice, 2023, 26(23): 2899-2906. |
[9] | CAO Ziyao, QIAN Cheng, XIE Guohua, CHANG Qingsong, WU Donghui. Analysis on the Correlation of Passive Suicidal Ideation with Thyroid Stimulating Hormone and Prolactin among Elderly Schizophrenia Inpatients [J]. Chinese General Practice, 2023, 26(23): 2894-2898. |
[10] | YANG Hui. Cooperated and Shared Care: Reflections on Treatment-prevention Integration [J]. Chinese General Practice, 2023, 26(22): 2711-2714. |
[11] | DENG Hongyu, WU Miaomiao, YANG Zheng, HE Yang, ZHU Linlin, ZHAO Qian, DAI Hua, WU Jia, LIAO Xiaoyang, ZHANG Yonggang. Construction of an Innovative Model of Chronic Disease Management in Compact County Medical Alliance with Treatment-prevention Integration [J]. Chinese General Practice, 2023, 26(22): 2720-2725. |
[12] | GE Anxin, ZHANG Guiqing, JIANG Liang, XING Wenlong, HU Min, LI Haohao, MENG Yao. Epidemiological Survey of the Prevalence and Associated Factors of Mental Disorders in Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region [J]. Chinese General Practice, 2023, 26(19): 2395-2401. |
[13] | LIU Rui, DENG Jing, CHEN Ailing, CHENG Peihua, LUO Xingneng, HU Yongjiao, ZHANG Munan. Influence of Policy Factors on Healthcare-seeking Behaviors in Patients with Schizophrenia [J]. Chinese General Practice, 2023, 26(19): 2385-2394. |
[14] | CAO Xiaolang, WANG Weiliang, YU Hong, WANG Xue, ZHOU Yuqiu. Application of Disability Point Matching Intervention Programme Based on Intervention Mapping Theory in Patients with Schizophrenia Disability [J]. Chinese General Practice, 2023, 26(19): 2376-2384,2394. |
[15] | TIAN Meixiang, ZHANG Zhengyi. Standard Management of Hypertension During the Preparation for Pregnancy [J]. Chinese General Practice, 2023, 26(18): 2190-2194. |
Viewed | ||||||
Full text |
|
|||||
Abstract |
|
|||||