The surgical nutrition puts emphasis on the regulation of postoperative patients recently.The artical reviewed the effects of recombinant human growth hormone on metabolism, defence and wound healing of postoperative patients.

OBJECTIVETo analyze interpersonal sensitivity level and influencing factors among patients in methadone maintenance treatment.

METHODSFrom 2010 June to 2011 June, the research was performed in Center of Methadone Maintenance Treatment of Nanjing Baixia District Hospital. A total of 272 methadone maintenance treatment was studied using a self-designed questionnaire, interpersonal sensitivity scale in symptom check list (SCL-90), self-rating depression scale (SDS), self-rating anxiety scale (SAS). If interpersonal sensitivity level ≥ 2 points, it was positive. In this study, through independent sample t test, analysis of the social demographic characteristics, depression and anxiety, interpersonal sensitivity level. Non conditional logistic regression analysis was used to explore a variety of factors, and the relationship of these factors with interpersonal sensitivity.

RESULTSThe depression score, the anxiety score and the level of interpersonal relationship sensitivity in 272 methadone maintenance treatment (1.65 ± 0.51, 47.66 ± 8.58, 42.38 ± 9.40) was higher than the national norm (1.65 ± 0.51, 41.88 ± 10.57, 29.78 ± 0.46) (t values were 8.23, 17.63 and 22.27, respectively; all P values < 0.001). In 272 methadone maintenance treatment, the percentage of men was 75.0% (204/272) and the percentage of women was 25.0% (68/272). SDS score of male and female was (48.38 ± 8.30) and (45.90 ± 9.34) points (t = 5.67, P = 0.037); Aged 20-29, 30-39, 40-49 and ≥ 50 years old group, SDS scores were (48.26 ± 7.59), (47.73 ± 8.38), (47.79 ± 9.22) and (48.09 ± 6.33) points (F = 3.90, P = 0.046); According to the drug's time, divided into 1-3, 4-6 and ≥ 7 years group, SDS scores were (45.92 ± 7.47), (47.41 ± 7.57) and (48.07 ± 8.57) points (F = 4.49, = 0.039). SAS score of male and female was (41.21 ± 9.53) and (42.91 ± 9.42) points (t = 2.23, P = 0.043). The positive rate of interpersonal sensitivity was 47.1% (128/272). Multivariate analysis showed that, with SDS and SAS scores increased by 1, respectively, interpersonal sensitivity increased 23.23 (8.62-96.68) and 11.97 (6.42-19.27) points.

CONCLUSIONInterpersonal sensitivity level in methadone maintenance treatment was higher than normal and depression; anxiety and depression both were the risk factors of interpersonal sensitivity level.

Adult ; Anxiety ; Depression ; Female ; Humans ; Interpersonal Relations ; Male ; Methadone ; therapeutic use ; Middle Aged ; Opiate Substitution Treatment ; psychology ; Risk Factors ; Surveys and Questionnaires ; Young Adult

Objective To analyze interpersonal sensitivity level and influencing factors among patients in methadone maintenance treatment. Methods From 2010 June to 2011 June, the research was performed in Center of Methadone Maintenance Treatment of Nanjing Baixia District Hospital. A total of 272 methadone maintenance treatment was studied using a self-designed questionnaire, interpersonal sensitivity scale in symptom check list (SCL-90), self-rating depression scale (SDS), self-rating anxiety scale (SAS). If interpersonal sensitivity level ≥2 points, it was positive. In this study, through independent sample t test, analysis of the social demographic characteristics, depression and anxiety, interpersonal sensitivity level. Non conditional logistic regression analysis was used to explore a variety of factors, and the relationship of these factors with interpersonal sensitivity. Results The depression score, the anxiety score and the level of interpersonal relationship sensitivity in 272 methadone maintenance treatment (1.65 ± 0.51, 47.66 ± 8.58, 42.38 ± 9.40) was higher than the national norm(1.65 ± 0.51,41.88 ± 10.57, 29.78 ± 0.46) (t values were 8.23, 17.63 and 22.27, respectively; all P values<0.001). In 272 methadone maintenance treatment, the percentage of men was 75.0% (204/272) and the percentage of women was 25.0% (68/272). SDS score of male and female was (48.38 ± 8.30) and (45.90 ± 9.34) points (t=5.67,P=0.037);Aged 20-29, 30-39, 40-49 and ≥50 years old group, SDS scores were (48.26 ± 7.59), (47.73 ± 8.38), (47.79 ± 9.22) and (48.09 ± 6.33) points (F=3.90, P=0.046); According to the drug's time ,divided into 1-3, 4-6 and ≥7 years group, SDS scores were (45.92 ± 7.47), (47.41 ± 7.57) and (48.07 ± 8.57) points (F=4.49,=0.039). SAS score of male and female was (41.21 ± 9.53) and (42.91 ± 9.42) points (t=2.23, P=0.043). The positive rate of interpersonal sensitivity was 47.1%(128/272). Multivariate analysis showed that, with SDS and SAS scores increased by 1, respectively, interpersonal sensitivity increased 23.23 (8.62-96.68) and 11.97 (6.42-19.27)points. Conclusion Interpersonal sensitivity level in methadone maintenance treatment was higher than normal and depression;anxiety and depression both were the risk factors of interpersonal sensitivity level.

Objective To analyze interpersonal sensitivity level and influencing factors among patients in methadone maintenance treatment. Methods From 2010 June to 2011 June, the research was performed in Center of Methadone Maintenance Treatment of Nanjing Baixia District Hospital. A total of 272 methadone maintenance treatment was studied using a self-designed questionnaire, interpersonal sensitivity scale in symptom check list (SCL-90), self-rating depression scale (SDS), self-rating anxiety scale (SAS). If interpersonal sensitivity level ≥2 points, it was positive. In this study, through independent sample t test, analysis of the social demographic characteristics, depression and anxiety, interpersonal sensitivity level. Non conditional logistic regression analysis was used to explore a variety of factors, and the relationship of these factors with interpersonal sensitivity. Results The depression score, the anxiety score and the level of interpersonal relationship sensitivity in 272 methadone maintenance treatment (1.65 ± 0.51, 47.66 ± 8.58, 42.38 ± 9.40) was higher than the national norm(1.65 ± 0.51,41.88 ± 10.57, 29.78 ± 0.46) (t values were 8.23, 17.63 and 22.27, respectively; all P values<0.001). In 272 methadone maintenance treatment, the percentage of men was 75.0% (204/272) and the percentage of women was 25.0% (68/272). SDS score of male and female was (48.38 ± 8.30) and (45.90 ± 9.34) points (t=5.67,P=0.037);Aged 20-29, 30-39, 40-49 and ≥50 years old group, SDS scores were (48.26 ± 7.59), (47.73 ± 8.38), (47.79 ± 9.22) and (48.09 ± 6.33) points (F=3.90, P=0.046); According to the drug's time ,divided into 1-3, 4-6 and ≥7 years group, SDS scores were (45.92 ± 7.47), (47.41 ± 7.57) and (48.07 ± 8.57) points (F=4.49,=0.039). SAS score of male and female was (41.21 ± 9.53) and (42.91 ± 9.42) points (t=2.23, P=0.043). The positive rate of interpersonal sensitivity was 47.1%(128/272). Multivariate analysis showed that, with SDS and SAS scores increased by 1, respectively, interpersonal sensitivity increased 23.23 (8.62-96.68) and 11.97 (6.42-19.27)points. Conclusion Interpersonal sensitivity level in methadone maintenance treatment was higher than normal and depression;anxiety and depression both were the risk factors of interpersonal sensitivity level.

Drug addiction is a major medical and social issue globally,but there is still a lack of ideal clinical treatments.Glucagon-like peptide-1(GLP-1),a key gut-brain peptide,and its receptor agonists have been approved for the treatment of type 2 diabetes and obesity.In recent years,the role of GLP-1 receptor agonists in combating drug addiction has received increasing attention.Based on an overview of the GLP-1 system and its receptor agonist,this article reviews the role of GLP-1 receptor agonists in drug addiction at both the nonclinical and clinical levels by focusing on addictive psychoactive substances(including alcohol,tobacco,cocaine,opioids,and amphetamines).Future developments are also predicted to provide new clues to the mechanism of drug addiction and development of therapeutic drugs.