Study On The Effect Of BaDuanJin On The Clinical Efficacy Of Generalized Anxiety Disorder

ObjectiveLearn about the effects of BaDuanJin on the clinical efficacy of generalized anxiety disorder (GAD)Methods64cases of patients with generalized anxiety disorder are rando mly divided into treatment group and control group. Each group incl udes32cases. Based on our department routine treatment combining traditional Chinese and Western Medicine, the treatment group did B aDuanJin exercise2times per week in group (1hours each time), an d practiced individually at the remaining time (half an hour per da y). The control group only used our routine treatment. The observat ion period is12weeks. HAMA scale and SAS scale are used for asses sment on the lth,2th,4th,8th and12th weekend. Finally, we used SPSS19.0software package for statistical analysis and got the res ults.Results1. The total scores of HAMA scale shows:Before and after12wee ks, the scores differences between intra-groups of HAMA scale of bo th treatment group and control group had statistical significance (P<0.01), which means the treatments of both groups are effective; after being conducted the treatment, the scores of HAMA scale at8th and12nd weeks of the treatment group were lower than which of cont rol group (P<0.05), which means the curative effect of treatment gr oup is better than which of control group after8weeks’treatment. When the12weeks’s treatment had been completed, the effective ra te of treatment group was90.0%while the effective rate of control group was only68.8%. The inter-group comparison had statistical d ifferences (P<0.05), showing that the total effective rate of treat ment group is higher than which of control group.2. The time points of total scores of HAMA scale shows:After1week treatment, the total scores of HAMA scale of treatment group h ad statistical differences (P<0.05) comparing with prior treatment. However, after4weeks treatment, the total scores of HAMA scale o f control group had statistical differences (P<0.05) comparing with prior treatment. That is to say, the treatment of treatment group took effect after1week but the treatment of control group took ef fect after4weeks. The treatment of treatment group was effective earlier than which of control group.3. The somatic anxiety factor scores of HAMA scale shows:Compar ed with prior treatment, the somatic anxiety factor scores differen ces between intra-groups before and after12weeks of HAMA scale of both treatment group and control group had statistical significanc e (P<0.01), which means the somatic anxiety treatments of both grou ps are effective; after12weeks treatment, the somatic anxiety fac tor scores of HAMA scale of treatment group was lower than which of control group (P<0.05), meaning that the curative effect of treat ment group is better than which of control group after12weeks’so matic anxiety treatment. In addition, the somatic anxiety factor sc ores of HAMA scale of treatment group had statistical differences (P<0.05) between after2weeks’treatment and prior treatment. The somatic anxiety factor scores of HAMA scale of control group had st atistical differences (P<0.05) between after4weeks’treatment and prior treatment. Therefore, the treatment of treatment group took effect after2weeks but the treatment of control group took effect after4weeks. The treatment of treatment group was effective earl ier than which of control group for somatic anxiety treatment.4. The psychic anxiety factor scores of HAMA scale shows:Compar ed with prior treatment, the psychic anxiety factor scores differen ces between intra-groups before and after12weeks of HAMA scale of both treatment group and control group had statistical significanc e (P<0.01), which means the psychic anxiety treatments of both grou ps are effective; after8weeks treatment, the psychic anxiety fact or scores of HAMA scale of treatment group was lower than which of control group (P<0.05), meaning that the curative effect of treatm ent group is better than which of control group after8weeks’psyc hie anxiety treatment. In addition, the psychic anxiety factor scor es of HAMA scale of treatment group had statistical differences (P<0.05) between after2weeks’treatment and prior treatment. The psy chic anxiety factor scores of HAMA scale of control group had stati stical differences (P<0.05) between after8weeks’treatment and pr ior treatment. Therefore, the treatment of treatment group took eff ect after2weeks but the treatment of control group took effect af ter8weeks. The treatment of treatment group was effective earlier than which of control group for psychic anxiety treatment.5. The scores of SAS scale shows:Before and after12weeks, the scores differences between intra-groups of SAS scale of both treat ment group and control group had statistical significance (P<0.01), which means the treatments of both groups are effective; after bei ng conducted the treatment, the scores of SAS scale at8th and12nd w eeks of the treatment group were lower than which of control group (P<0.05), which means the curative effect of treatment group is bet ter than which of control group after8weeks’treatment.Conclusions1. Practicing BaDuanJin help promote the curative effect.2. Practicing BaDuanJin as an adjuvant therapy for generalized a nxiety disorder takes effect quickly and the curative effect mainta ins stably.3. Practicing BaDuanJin have certain curative effect for the som atic and psychic symptom of generalized anxiety disorder, and the c urative effect is better than control group.4. BaDuanJin is easy to learn and convenient to practice. It can enhance compliance and subjective initiative of patients, and wort h clinical promotion.