药学院贫困生状态-特质焦虑问卷调查结果分析

应用状态-特质焦虑量表对药学院131名贫困大学生进行调查评定,结果发现贫困生与一般人群在特质焦虑水平上差异无显著性意义,而在状态焦虑水平出现显著性差异。提出应加强贫困大学生心理健康教育,完善社会资助体系,帮助贫困生摆脱焦虑情绪。     

卒中偏瘫后应激性心理障碍的临床分析

目的分析因卒中偏瘫住院病人的应激性心理障碍的表现特征,探讨主要相关因素及转归。方法将1999~2003年同期住院病人分成不同的年龄段,设有偏瘫的卒中组、无偏瘫的卒中组、非卒中的组,比较不同组间的应激性心理障碍的焦虑程度、行为。结果有偏瘫的卒中组应激性心理障碍最严重,组间焦虑症比较,P<0.01,差异显著,并与年龄、护理人员的构成、经济来源、是否首次住院密切相关。结论对偏瘫的恐惧感是应激性心理障碍的重要因素。对偏瘫致残的恐惧感随年龄增长而加重,随卒中的反复加重消失。     

米氮平与舍曲林治疗抑郁症伴有焦虑疗效比较

目的 :比较米氮平与舍曲林对抑郁症伴焦虑的疗效及其安全性。方法 :1 1 1例抑郁症分为 2组。米氮平组 56例 [男性 30例 ,女性 2 6例 ,年龄(39±s 1 3)a,本次抑郁病期 (3± 5)mo]予米氮平30～ 45mg ,po,qd;舍曲林组 55例 [男性 2 9例 ,女性 2 6例 ,年龄 (40± 1 2 )a,本次抑郁症病期 (4± 4)mo]予舍曲林 50～ 1 0 0mg,po,qd;均 6wk为一个疗程。结果 :对抑郁症状的治疗 ,米氮平组显效率73 % ,舍曲林组显效率 67% ,疗效差异无显著意义(P >0 .0 5) ;对焦虑症状的治疗 ,米氮平组显效率79 % ,舍曲林组显效率 44 % ,疗效差异有显著意义(P <0 .0 5)。整体药物不良反应发生率 2组相当。结论 :米氮平与舍曲林是安全有效的治疗抑郁症的药物 ,但抗焦虑作用米氮平优于舍曲林     

Practitioner Review: Unguided and guided self-help interventions for common mental health disorders in children and adolescents: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Mental health problems are common in children and adolescents, yet evidence-based treatments are hard to access. Self-help interventions can increase such access. The aim of this paper was to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of the use of guided and unguided self-help for children and young people with symptoms of common mental health disorders. In contrast to previous reviews of self-help in children, all types of self-help and multiple mental health disorders were investigated in order to increase power to investigate potential moderators of efficacy. Importantly, studies with control arms as well as those comparing against traditional face-to-face treatments were included. Fifty studies (n = 3396 participants in self-help/guided self-help conditions) met the inclusion criteria. Results demonstrated a moderate positive effect size for guided and unguided self-help interventions when compared against a control group (n = 44; g = 0.49; 95% CI: 0.37 to 0.61, p < .01) and a small but significant negative effect size when compared to other therapies (n = 15; g = −0.17; 95% CI: –0.27 to –0.07, p < .01). Few potential moderators had a significant effect on outcome. Most comparisons resulted in significant heterogeneity and therefore results are interpreted with caution.     

大肠癌患者心理状况及应对方式对生存质量的影响

目的：探讨大肠癌患者不同的应对方式、心理状况对生存质量的影响,为采取相应的措施而提供科学依据。方法：于2014年11－2015年11月对某两所医院确诊住院的248例大肠癌患者应用癌症患者生存质量量表、医院焦虑抑郁量表评价及简单应对方式问卷进行调查评价。结果：大肠癌患者的生存质量各维度均处于中等偏下的水平;男性、居住于城市及经商的患者生存质量高于女性、居住于农村及其他职业的患者;无配偶只在躯体维度评分低于有配偶的,差异有统计学意义（P＜0．05）;采取积极应对方式的大肠癌患者的生存质量高于消极应对方式的患者,差异有统计学意义（P＜0．05）;消极应对方式和焦虑、抑郁是大肠癌患者生存质量的影响因素,差异有统计学意义（P＜0．05）。消极应对方式、焦虑、抑郁与QOL－LC总分呈负相关;积极应对方式与QOL－LC总分呈正相关。结论：医护人员应该关注患者的心理状态,鼓励其积极面对疾病,从而提高患者的生存质量。     

Depression,anxiety and disease-related distress in couples affected by advanced lung cancer

Objectives

Lung cancer patients and their partners are prone to high levels of depression and anxiety or severe distress related to the poor prognosis of the illness. However, there remain doubts regarding the extent to which this distress exceeds levels in the general population. This study explored levels of depression and generalized anxiety for comparison with matched data of a representative sample from the general population. Additionally, covariance of distress between the two partners, together with disease-specific components and differences were investigated.

Materials and methods

In a cross-sectional survey, 54 pairs of lung cancer patients and their partners (n = 108) were assessed for depression and anxiety, cancer-related distress, unmet needs and disclosure in communication. Comparisons between distress levels of participating couples and matched community-comparisons (n = 162) were conducted. Additionally, multilevel analysis for estimating intra-dyadic associations of anxiety and depression was computed. Components of distress, needs and aspects of communication were explored via item mean values.

Results

Lung cancer patients as well as their partners exhibited significantly higher levels of depression and anxiety when compared to community-based comparison subjects (patients: mean difference of 1.01 for depression with a relative risk (RR) of 4.5 and 0.84 for anxiety with RR = 6.1; partners: 1.17 for depression with RR = 4.6 and 1.59 for anxiety with RR = 7.6). Partial intraclass correlations between patients and partners were weak (PIC = .29 for depression; PIC = .21 for anxiety). Fear of progression emerged as main component of distress for both patients and partners, although differing stressors were described.

Conclusion

Lung cancer-affected couples exhibit levels of depression and anxiety far exceeding those of the general community. In clinical practice, patients and partners should be assessed separately for distress against the background of weak intra-dyadic associations. In cases of significant depression or anxiety, referral for psychosocial treatment is indicated and has been shown to improve quality of life.