Prediction of improvement by use of epinephrine-methacholine (mecholyl) test; study of immediate response in twenty-six treated patients and one-year follow-up of forty-eight treated patients.

J. Satterfield
{"title":"Prediction of improvement by use of epinephrine-methacholine (mecholyl) test; study of immediate response in twenty-six treated patients and one-year follow-up of forty-eight treated patients.","authors":"J. Satterfield","doi":"10.1001/ARCHNEURPSYC.1959.02340160111016","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction There has long been a search for a physiological test which would predict response to therapy in psychiatric disease. Gold, 1 in 1943, and, later, Funkenstein 2-7 described such a test. The test as usually described consists of following the blood pressure response to either epinephrine and methacholine (Mecholyl), given at different times, preferably on different days, or to methacholine alone. On the basis of the blood pressure response to these drugs, patients may be divided into two categories: those with favorable and those with unfavorable prognosis. Because of the importance of having a physiological test of predictive value, I decided to extend the studies thus far reported by repeating the original ones and by a long-term study, which, as far as I know, is the first such investigation reported. Procedure and Results Attempt at Confirmation of the Epinephrine-Methacholine Test In an effort to evaluate the autonomic test described","PeriodicalId":6866,"journal":{"name":"A.M.A. archives of neurology and psychiatry","volume":"15 1","pages":"513-6"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1959-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"A.M.A. archives of neurology and psychiatry","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1001/ARCHNEURPSYC.1959.02340160111016","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

Abstract

Introduction There has long been a search for a physiological test which would predict response to therapy in psychiatric disease. Gold, 1 in 1943, and, later, Funkenstein 2-7 described such a test. The test as usually described consists of following the blood pressure response to either epinephrine and methacholine (Mecholyl), given at different times, preferably on different days, or to methacholine alone. On the basis of the blood pressure response to these drugs, patients may be divided into two categories: those with favorable and those with unfavorable prognosis. Because of the importance of having a physiological test of predictive value, I decided to extend the studies thus far reported by repeating the original ones and by a long-term study, which, as far as I know, is the first such investigation reported. Procedure and Results Attempt at Confirmation of the Epinephrine-Methacholine Test In an effort to evaluate the autonomic test described
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
肾上腺素-甲胆碱(甲基)试验对改善的预测;26例治疗患者的即时反应研究和48例治疗患者的1年随访。
长期以来,人们一直在寻找一种生理测试来预测精神疾病治疗的反应。1943年的Gold,以及后来的Funkenstein 2-7都描述了这样的测试。通常描述的测试包括跟踪血压对肾上腺素和甲胆碱(甲胆碱)的反应,在不同的时间给药,最好是在不同的日子给药,或者单独给甲胆碱。根据对这些药物的血压反应,可将患者分为预后良好和预后不良两类。由于具有预测价值的生理测试的重要性,我决定通过重复原始研究和长期研究来扩展迄今为止报道的研究,据我所知,这是第一次报道这样的研究。程序和结果确认肾上腺素-甲胆碱试验的尝试评价所描述的自主神经试验
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Pelizaeus-Merzbacher disease. Word deafness and Wernicke's aphasia; report of cases and discussion of the syndrome. Cerebral embolism; the natural history, prognostic signs and effects of anticoagulation. Muscle dystrophy in mice of the Bar Harbor strain; an electromyographic comparison with dystrophia myotonica in man. Intracranial aneurysms; methods of treatment; value of hypothermia in the surgical approach.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1