强迫症的药物治疗:基于诊断和计量限制的研究结果综述。

Psychiatric developments Pub Date : 1987-01-01
K E Towbin, J F Leckman, D J Cohen
{"title":"强迫症的药物治疗:基于诊断和计量限制的研究结果综述。","authors":"K E Towbin,&nbsp;J F Leckman,&nbsp;D J Cohen","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Nearly every category of psychotropic drug has been investigated in an attempt to find a pharmacologic treatment for obsessive compulsive disorder (OCD). This study reviews published trials from the English literature in which tricyclic antidepressants, monoamine oxidase inhibitors, neuroleptics, benzodiazepines, and other agents were employed for treatment of OCD. Weaknesses in the current methodology including diagnosis, measurement of severity and criteria for improvement have contributed to invalid conclusions about drug treatment and efficacy. It appears that OCD is an etiologically heterogeneous disorder with a complex differential diagnosis. For the clinician, a major conclusion drawn from this review is that no agent emerges as a drug of choice. Although clorimipramine, the most actively investigated agent, shows some promise, it has not been conclusively demonstrated that other, more readily available heterocyclic agents are less effective. Furthermore, when other disorders co-exist, such as panic disorder, alternative agents may prove as effective.</p>","PeriodicalId":77773,"journal":{"name":"Psychiatric developments","volume":"5 1","pages":"25-50"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1987-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Drug treatment of obsessive-compulsive disorder: a review of findings in the light of diagnostic and metric limitations.\",\"authors\":\"K E Towbin,&nbsp;J F Leckman,&nbsp;D J Cohen\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Nearly every category of psychotropic drug has been investigated in an attempt to find a pharmacologic treatment for obsessive compulsive disorder (OCD). This study reviews published trials from the English literature in which tricyclic antidepressants, monoamine oxidase inhibitors, neuroleptics, benzodiazepines, and other agents were employed for treatment of OCD. Weaknesses in the current methodology including diagnosis, measurement of severity and criteria for improvement have contributed to invalid conclusions about drug treatment and efficacy. It appears that OCD is an etiologically heterogeneous disorder with a complex differential diagnosis. For the clinician, a major conclusion drawn from this review is that no agent emerges as a drug of choice. Although clorimipramine, the most actively investigated agent, shows some promise, it has not been conclusively demonstrated that other, more readily available heterocyclic agents are less effective. Furthermore, when other disorders co-exist, such as panic disorder, alternative agents may prove as effective.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":77773,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Psychiatric developments\",\"volume\":\"5 1\",\"pages\":\"25-50\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1987-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Psychiatric developments\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychiatric developments","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

几乎每一种精神药物都被研究过,试图找到一种治疗强迫症的药理学方法。本研究回顾了英国文献中发表的三环抗抑郁药、单胺氧化酶抑制剂、神经抑制剂、苯二氮卓类药物和其他药物用于治疗强迫症的试验。目前的方法包括诊断、严重程度的测量和改进标准的弱点导致了关于药物治疗和疗效的无效结论。强迫症似乎是一种病因异质性的疾病,具有复杂的鉴别诊断。对于临床医生来说,从这篇综述中得出的一个主要结论是,没有一种药物成为首选药物。虽然氯丙咪嗪是研究最活跃的药物,显示出一些希望,但还没有最终证明其他更容易获得的杂环药物效果较差。此外,当其他疾病共存时,如恐慌症,替代药物可能被证明是有效的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Drug treatment of obsessive-compulsive disorder: a review of findings in the light of diagnostic and metric limitations.

Nearly every category of psychotropic drug has been investigated in an attempt to find a pharmacologic treatment for obsessive compulsive disorder (OCD). This study reviews published trials from the English literature in which tricyclic antidepressants, monoamine oxidase inhibitors, neuroleptics, benzodiazepines, and other agents were employed for treatment of OCD. Weaknesses in the current methodology including diagnosis, measurement of severity and criteria for improvement have contributed to invalid conclusions about drug treatment and efficacy. It appears that OCD is an etiologically heterogeneous disorder with a complex differential diagnosis. For the clinician, a major conclusion drawn from this review is that no agent emerges as a drug of choice. Although clorimipramine, the most actively investigated agent, shows some promise, it has not been conclusively demonstrated that other, more readily available heterocyclic agents are less effective. Furthermore, when other disorders co-exist, such as panic disorder, alternative agents may prove as effective.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Avoidance behaviour and major depression in panic disorder: a report from the Cross-National Collaborative Panic Study. Rationale for the planned clinical trials with nerve growth factor in Alzheimer's disease. The Parental Bonding Instrument: psychometric properties reviewed. Two kinds of borderline concepts. Conceptual and empirical agreement between DSM-III, DIB, and Kernberg. Dreaming: the impact of life stress events.
×
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