国家科技部中国科技论文统计源期刊   中国科技核心期刊   WHO西太平洋地区医学索引(WPRIM)收录期刊   湖北优秀期刊
《药物流行病学杂志》官方网站与投审稿系统变更通知<点击查看详情>
我院普外科术后多种镇痛方案的药物经济学评价
Cost effectiveness Analysis of Multimodal Analgesia Regimens in Treatment of Postoperative Pain in General Surgery Department
  
DOI:
中文关键词:  静脉自控镇痛  地佐辛;非甾体抗炎药;术后疼痛;成本 效果分析
英文关键词:PCIA  Dezocine  NSAIDs  Postoperative analgesic  Cost effectiveness analysis
基金项目:
作者单位
孟安娜1 谢菡1 杨长青2 马正良 3 仇毓东 4 葛卫红 1 1.南京大学医学院附属鼓楼医院药学部南京 2100082.中国药科大学基础医学与临床药学院3.南京大学医学院附属鼓楼医院麻醉科4南京大学医学院附属鼓楼医院普外科 
摘要点击次数: 1394
全文下载次数: 863
中文摘要:
      摘 要 目的:探讨多种术后镇痛方案用于普外科术后镇痛治疗的药物经济学效果。方法:选择南京鼓楼医院中度至重度疼痛的普外科术后患者426例,随机分成3组:A组147例[多模式镇痛:经静脉自控镇痛(PCIA)+非甾体抗炎药(NSAIDs)]、B组146例(地佐辛)和C组133例(NSAIDs)治疗术后疼痛,疗程 1 周,观察镇痛疗效并运用成本 效果法分析。结果:A、B、C组显著缓解率分别为85.71%、78.08%、90.98%;总缓解率为100.00%、99.32%、99.25%。各组均无严重不良反应发生。A、B、C组成本 效果比分别为10.37,28.53,11.24,B、C组相对于A组的增量成本 效果比分别为2.78,1.08。结论:术后1周内,3组方案总缓解率无明显差异,A组花费最低,总缓解率最高;B组花费最高,且不良反应比例相对最高。
英文摘要:
      ABSTRACT Objective:To investigate the cost effectiveness of three programs in postoperative analgesic of general surgery department. Methods:All 426 cases of patients with moderate to severe postoperative pain in Nanjing Drum Tower Hospital were randomly assigned to 3 groups to receive Patient controlled intravenous analgesia(PCIA)+NSAIDs (group A), dezocine (group B) or NSAIDs (group C) for 7 days. A cost effectiveness analysis was performed on three groups. Results: The effective rates were 85.71%, 78.08% and 90.98% respectively in the A, B and C groups, and the total remission rate was 100.00%, 99.32% and 99.25% respectively. No serious adverse events occurred in each group. The cost effectiveness ratios were 10.37, 28.53 and 11.24 respectively. The incremental cost effectiveness ratio was 2.78 for group B, as compared with 1.08 for group C. Conclusion: There was no significant difference in the total remission rate between the three groups after one week, but the dezocine group had the highest cost and the proportion of adverse reactions was relatively high. The cost of group A were the least in the three groups.
查看全文  查看/发表评论  下载PDF阅读器
关闭