4.1 Article

Ambulatory Heart Rate Variability in Schizophrenia or Depression Impact of Anticholinergic Burden and Other Factors

期刊

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PSYCHOPHARMACOLOGY
卷 41, 期 2, 页码 121-128

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/JCP.0000000000001356

关键词

schizophrenia; depression; anticholinergics; antipsychotics; antidepressants

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study found that HRV in patients with schizophrenia or depression is influenced by factors such as age, diagnosis, anticholinergic burden of medication, and ongoing physical activity. A quantified score of anticholinergic burden has a negative relationship with HRV, while sex, nicotine use, and BMI have minimal effects on HRV.
Background Heart rate variability (HRV) has been found reduced in patients with schizophrenia and depression. However, there is a lack of knowledge on how demographic, lifestyle, and pharmacological factors contribute to the reduction in HRV in these patients. Methods We recruited 37 patients with schizophrenia, 43 patients with unipolar depression, and 64 healthy controls. A combined chest-worn HRV and accelerometer device was used in an ambulatory measurement. Age, sex, anticholinergic burden of medication, nicotine use, body mass index, and ongoing physical activity were assessed in multiple regression models regarding their influence on HRV, measured as the standard deviation of all the RR intervals (SDNN). Results In the fully adjusted model, schizophrenia (beta = -0.23, P = 0.019), depression (beta = -0.18, P = 0.028), age (beta = -0.34, P < 0.000), ongoing physical activity (beta = -0.23, P = 0.001), and anticholinergic burden (beta = -0.19, P = 0.025) influenced SDNN negatively. Sex, nicotine use, and BMI had negligible effects on SDNN. Conclusions We show for the first time that a quantified score of anticholinergic burden of medication has a negative relationship to HRV in patients with schizophrenia or depression, but that the diagnoses themselves still exhibit an effect on HRV.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.1
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据