Effects of phototherapy plus agomelatine on efficacy, negative emotions, and neurotransmitter levels in elderly patients with depressive disorders

Table 1 Comparative analysis of baseline data, n (%)

Indicator	Control group (n = 60)	Research group (n = 67)	χ2/t/Z	P value
Gender			0.348	0.555
Male	38 (63.33)	39 (58.21)
Female	22 (36.67)	28 (41.79)
Age (years)	70.25 ± 4.62	70.01 ± 5.00	0.280	0.780
Disease duration (years)	3.00 (2.25, 4.00)	4.00 (2.00, 4.00)	-0.917	0.359
BMI (kg/m2)	23.15 ± 2.20	23.04 ± 2.01	0.294	0.769
Marital status			1.736	0.188
Not married	20 (33.33)	30 (44.78)
Married	40 (66.67)	37 (55.22)
Family history			0.241	0.624
Absent	47 (78.33)	50 (74.63)
Present	13 (21.67)	17 (25.37)

Table 2 Comparative analysis of treatment efficacy, n (%)

Indicator	Control group (n = 60)	Research group (n = 67)	χ2	P value
Markedly effective	18 (30.00)	30 (44.78)
Effective	29 (48.33)	31 (46.27)
Ineffective	13 (21.67)	6 (8.96)
Total effective rate	47 (78.33)	61 (91.04)	4.020	0.045

Table 3 Correlation analysis between changes in neurotransmitter levels and Hamilton Depression Scale score reduction rate

Marker	r	P value
ΔDA (pmol/L) vs HAMD score reduction rate (%)	0.225	0.011
ΔNE (mg/L) vs HAMD score reduction rate (%)	0.122	0.173
Δ5-HT (μg/L) vs HAMD score reduction rate (%)	0.097	0.280

DA: Dopamine; NE: Norepinephrine; 5-HT: Serotonin; HAMD: Hamilton Depression Scale score.

Table 4 Comparative analysis of safety, n (%)

Indicator	Control group (n = 60)	Research group (n = 67)	χ2	P value
Nausea and vomiting	2 (3.33)	1 (1.49)
Dry mouth	2 (3.33)	2 (2.99)
Sweaty	4 (6.67)	3 (4.48)
Headache	1 (1.67)	4 (5.97)
Eye fatigue	2 (3.33)	3 (4.48)
Total	11 (18.33)	13 (19.40)	0.024	0.878