Open Access


Read more
image01

Online Manuscript Submission


Read more
image01

Submitted Manuscript Trail


Read more
image01

Online Payment


Read more
image01

Online Subscription


Read more
image01

Email Alert



Read more
image01

Original Research Article | OPEN ACCESS

Comparative studies on the therapeutic and adverse effects of mirtazapine and fluoxetine in the treatment of adult depression

Liping Zhang1, Mei Long2, Lijuan Xu3

1The Medical Department of Zaozhuang Municipal Hospital; 2Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Zaozhuang Downtown District Women and Children Health Care Hospital; 3Department of Science and Education, Zaozhuang Municipal Hospital, Zaozhuang City, China.

For correspondence:-  Lijuan Xu   Email: jv1174@163.com

Accepted: 27 December 2018        Published: 31 January 2019

Citation: Zhang L, Long M, Xu L. Comparative studies on the therapeutic and adverse effects of mirtazapine and fluoxetine in the treatment of adult depression. Trop J Pharm Res 2019; 18(1):135-139 doi: 10.4314/tjpr.v18i1.20

© 2019 The authors.
This is an Open Access article that uses a funding model which does not charge readers or their institutions for access and distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0) and the Budapest Open Access Initiative (http://www.budapestopenaccessinitiative.org/read), which permit unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited..

Abstract

Purpose: To evaluate comparatively the therapeutic and adverse effects of mirtazapine and fluoxetine for the management of adult depression.
Methods: Adults (58) with depression admitted to the Neurology Department of Zaozhuang Municipal Hospital from August 2014 to July 2016 were randomly assigned to either mirtazapine group or fluoxetine group. Those in mirtazapine group were given mirtazapine while the fluoxetine group took fluoxetine. The patients were graded for Hamilton Depression Scale (HAMD) and Treatment Emergent Symptoms Scale (TESS) scores before treatment and at weeks 2, 4, 6, and 8 post-treatment, with the aim of comparing therapeutic effects and adverse reactions to mirtazapine and fluoxetine.
Results: The therapeutic effects seen in the two groups did not differ significantly (p > 0.05), but mirtazapine had a slight advantage over fluoxetine. Effectiveness appeared after 2 weeks in the mirtazapine group, and 4 weeks in the other group. Moreover, there were significant differences in HAMD scores between the two groups after 2 and 4 weeks of treatment (p < 0.05), but the differences in scores after 6 and 8 weeks of treatment were not significant (p > 0.05). However, there were significant differences in score between pretreatment and 8-week post-treatment scores (p < 0.05). Mirtazapine group also had lower incidents of adverse reactions (sleepiness, dyspepsia, nausea, vomiting, excitation, and headache) than the fluoxetine group (p < 0.05).
Conclusion: Mirtazapine has similar effect as fluoxetine in the treatment of adult depression, but works faster, with low incidence of adverse reactions. Thus, it is a safer and quicker antidepressant for clinical application.

Keywords: Mirtazapine, Fluoxetine, Adult depression, Clinical effect, Adverse reactions

Impact Factor
Thompson Reuters (ISI): 0.6 (2023)
H-5 index (Google Scholar): 49 (2023)

Article Tools

Share this article with



Article status: Free
Fulltext in PDF
Similar articles in Google
Similar article in this Journal:

Archives

2024; 23: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10
2023; 22: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2022; 21: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2021; 20: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2020; 19: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2019; 18: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2018; 17: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2017; 16: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2016; 15: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2015; 14: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2014; 13: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2013; 12: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6
2012; 11: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6
2011; 10: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6
2010; 9: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6
2009; 8: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6
2008; 7: 
1,   2,   3,   4
2007; 6: 
1,   2,   3,   4
2006; 5: 
1,   2
2005; 4: 
1,   2
2004; 3: 
1
2003; 2: 
1,   2
2002; 1: 
1,   2

News Updates