|
|||||
|
|
| 3种治疗下呼吸道感染方案的成本-效果分析 | |
| 引用本文： | 刘玉兰,李佐军. 3种治疗下呼吸道感染方案的成本-效果分析[J]. 中国药房, 2001, 12(2): 92-94 |
| 作者姓名： | 刘玉兰 李佐军 |
| 作者单位： | 湖南医科大学附属第三医院药剂科, |
| 摘 要： | 目的 :评价下呼吸道感染的3种治疗方案所产生的药物经济学效果。方法 :运用成本 -效果分析法对3种治疗方案进行分析。结果 :从有效率来看 ,青霉素 -哌拉西林组 (L1 组 )的成本 -效果比最小 ;从治愈率来看 ,头孢噻肟钠组 (L3)与L1 组的成本 -效果比无显著性差异 (P>0 05) ,而环丙沙星 -克林霉素组 (L2)的成本 -效果比明显高于L1 组和L3 组 (P<0.05)。结论 :L1 组为最佳治疗方案 ,L3 组虽然成本高 ,但治愈率也高 ,不良反应少 ,有利于提高患者生命质量 |
| 关 键 词： | 下呼吸道感染 药物经济学 成本-效果分析 |
| 文章编号： | 1001-0408(2001)02-0092-03 |
| 修稿时间： | 2000-06-16 |
The Cost-effectivenessAnalysis of Three Therapeutic Schemes for Lower Respiratory Tract Infections |
|
| LIU Yulan,Li Zuojun. The Cost-effectivenessAnalysis of Three Therapeutic Schemes for Lower Respiratory Tract Infections[J]. China Pharmacy, 2001, 12(2): 92-94 | |
| Authors: | LIU Yulan Li Zuojun |
| Abstract: | OBJECTIVE:To evaluate the pharmacoeconomic effectiveness of three therapeutic schemes for lower respiratory tract infections.METHODS:The cost-effectiveness analysis of three therapeutic schemes for lower respiratory tract infections was carried out.RESULTS:The cost-effectiveness ratio of penicillin-piperacillin schemes(L1)was minimum in respect to the effective rate.However,the cost-effectiveness ratios had no significant difference between cefotaxime scheme(L3)and L1 sche_me in regard to cure rate(P>0.05),the cost-effectiveness ratio of ciprofloxacin-clinadmacin scheme(L2) was higher significantly than those of L1 and L3 schemes(P<0.05,both schemes).CONCLUSION:L1 is the best therapeutic scheme.Although L3 scheme had higher cost,it had higher cure rate and lower ADRs occurrence.L3 scheme is benefitial to improvement of patient's life quality. |
| Keywords: | lower respiratory tract infection pharmacoeconomics cost-effectiveness analysis |
| 本文献已被 CNKI 维普 万方数据 等数据库收录！ | |