I类切口预防用抗菌药物的持续干预效果分析

目的：探讨该院I类切口手术预防用抗菌药物的干预控制措施和效果。方法选取该院2011年1—6月收治的289例行I类切口手术患者作为非干预组，另选2012—2014年上半年收治的行I类切口手术患者作为干预组，比较分析I类切口手术预防用抗菌药物的应用规范情况。结果非干预组I类切口手术预防用抗菌药物的总使用率为99.3%，干预组1，2，3的使用率分别为79.5%，69.4%，56.5%。干预前一代头孢菌素在I 类切口中的预防使用率为22.6%；干预组1，2，3分别为43.1%，55.4%，65.8%；通过临床药师的干预，该院预防用药的选药、用药指征、给药时机、使用剂量与用法、术中追加情况、预防用药疗程等各方面的合理率都有所提高。结论该院实施的干预措施对规范I类切口预防用抗菌药物起了积极的作用，取得了显著的效果。

Analysis of the Continued Intervention Effect of Prophylactic Use of An-tibacterials on Type I Incision

Objective To investigate the intervention and control measures and effect of prophylactic use of antibacterials for the surgeries with type I incision underwent in our hospital. Methods 289 surgeries with type I incision underwent in our hospital from January 2011 to June 2011 were selected as the non-intervention group, and other surgeries with type I incision underwent from 2012 to the first half of 2014 were selected as the intervention group. And the normalization of prophylactic use of antibacterials for surgeries with type I incision was compared and analyzed between the groups. Results The total utilization ratio of prophylactic use of antibacterials in the non-intervention group was 99.3%, and that in intervention group 1, intervention group 2, intervention group 3 was 79.5%, 69.4%, 56.5%, respectively. The ratio of 1st generation prophylactic use of cephalosporins in non-intervention group was 22.6%, and that in intervention group1, intervention group 2, intervention group 3 was 43.1%, 55.4%, 65.8%, succes-sively. Through the intervention of clinical pharmacists, the rationality rate has been greatly improved in selection of the drugs for prophylactic use, indications of drug use, time of administration, dosage and administration, intraoperative additional medication and the course of preventive medication in our hospital. Conclusion The intervention measures implemented in our hospital play a positive role in standardizing the prophylactic use of antibacterials for type I incision, which have achieved significant results.