亲子团体情绪调节及心理韧性训练在青少年抑郁症患者中的疗效  

Efficacy of parent-child emotional regulation and resilience group training on adolescent depression

作　　者：程俊香 赵娟[1] 冯耀清 宋保利[1] 李英[1] 陈洋洁 刘晓梅 韩世范[1] Cheng Junxiang;Zhao Juan;Feng Yaoqing;Song Baoli;Li Ying;Chen Yangjie;Liu Xiaomei;Han Shifan(Psychiatry Department,the First Hospital of Shanxi Medical University,Taiyuan 030001,China;College of Nursing,Shanxi Medical University,Taiyuan 030001,China)

机构地区：[1]山西医科大学第一医院精神卫生科,太原030001 [2]山西医科大学护理学院,太原030001

出　　处：《中华行为医学与脑科学杂志》2023年第12期1078-1085,共8页Chinese Journal of Behavioral Medicine and Brain Science

基　　金：山西省基础研究计划(20210302123435)。

摘　　要：目的探讨亲子团体情绪调节及心理韧性训练在青少年抑郁症患者中的应用效果。方法2020年8月—2021年9月纳入青少年抑郁症患者118例,采用随机数字表法将患者分为试验组(66例)和对照组(66例)。试验组给予药物治疗和亲子团体情绪调节及心理韧性训练,对照组给予药物治疗和临床常用个体、家庭或团体治疗。采用汉密尔顿抑郁量表(Hamilton depression rating scale,HAMD)、Connor-Davidson心理韧性量表(Connor-Davidson resilience scale,CD-RISC)、Herth希望量表(Herth hope scale,HHS)、家庭亲密度与适应性量表(family adaptability and cohesion evaluation scale,second edition Chinese version,FACES-Ⅱ-CV)于基线、干预第12周、第24周、第36周末对两组患者进行评估。采用SPSS 26.0统计软件对数据进行重复测量方差分析。结果(1)两组HAMD得分交互效应(F=54.0,P<0.001),组别主效应(F=401.4,P<0.001),时间主效应(F=116.6,P<0.001)均显著。进一步作简单效应分析,试验组干预后各时间点HAMD评分[(26.2±6.5)分、(19.3±5.9)分、(11.3±5.6)分]与对照组[(33.1±9.1)分、(30.3±7.9)分、(25.0±8.4)分]相比均差异有统计学意义(均P<0.05)。组内比较,试验组和对照组在各时间点间的HAMD评分均低于干预前(均P<0.05)。(2)两组患者CD-RISC评分的交互效应(F=72.1,P<0.001),组别主效应(F=48.9,P<0.001),时间主效应(F=174.9,P<0.001)显著。进一步简单效应分析,试验组干预后各时间点CD-RISC评分均高于对照组(均P<0.05);组内比较,试验组、对照组干预后各时间点CD-RISC评分均高于干预前(均P<0.05)。(3)两组患者HHS评分交互作用(F=121.6,P<0.001),组别主效应(F=57.4,P<0.001),时间主效应(F=208.1,P<0.001)均显著。进一步简单效应分析,试验组干预后各时间点HHS评分均高于对照组(均P<0.05);组内比较,试验组、对照组干预后各时间点HHS评分均高于干预前(均P<0.05)。(4)两组患者FACES-Ⅱ-CV评分的交互作用(F=45.0,P<0.00ObjectiveTo explore the application effect of parent-child emotional regulation and resilience group training in adolescent depression patients.MethodsFrom August 2020 to September 2021,a total of 118 adolescent depression patients were enrolled and randomly divided into the intervention group(66 cases)and the control group(66 cases)by a random number table method.The intervention group received medication therapy and parent-child group emotional regulation and psychological resilience training,while the control group received medication therapy and commonly used individual,family or group therapy in clinical practice.The Hamilton Depression rating scale(HAMD-24 version),Herth hope scale(HHS),Connor-Davidson resilience scale(CD-RISC),and family adaptability and cohesion evaluation scale,second edition Chinese version(FACES-Ⅱ-CV)were adopted to investigate participants at baseline,12-week,24-week,and 36-week after intervention.SPSS 26.0 statistical software was used to perform repeated measurement analysis of variance on the data.Results(1)The interaction effect between two groups of HAMD scores(F=54.0,P<0.001),group main effect(F=401.4,P<0.001),and time main effect(F=116.6,P<0.001)were all significant.Further simple effect analysis showed that there were statistically significant differences in HAMD scores at various time points after intervention between the intervention group(26.2±6.5,19.3±5.9,11.3±5.6)and the control group(33.1±9.1,30.3±7.9,25.0±8.4)(all P<0.05).Intragroup comparison showed the HAMD scores of the intervention group and control group at each time point after intervention were lower than those before intervention(all P<0.05).(2)The interaction effect of CD-RISC scores between two groups of patients(F=72.1,P<0.001),group main effect(F=48.9,P<0.001),and time main effect(F=174.9,P<0.001)were significant.Further simple effect analysis showed that the CD-RISC score of the intervention group at each time point after intervention were higher than those of the control group(all P<0.05).Intragrou

关 键 词：抑郁症 青少年 亲子 心理韧性 情绪调节 团体训练 希望 

分 类 号：R749.4[医药卫生—神经病学与精神病学]