3种用药方案治疗慢性宫颈炎的药物经济学分析

目的评价3种用药方案治疗慢性宫颈炎的经济学效果。方法 236例慢性宫颈炎患者随机分为3组,按照给药方案的不同分别为中药组(给予保妇康栓+妇科千金片)、西药组(给予重组人α2a干扰素栓+克拉霉素片)和中西药结合组(给予保妇康栓+克拉霉素片),根据临床疗效选择适宜的药物经济学分析法进行研究。结果中药组、西药组和中西药结合组的治愈率、总有效率分别为48.61%/79.17%、68.67%/90.36%、71.60%/93.83%,具有显著性差异,进行成本-效果分析,成本-效果比分别为2.99、5.04、4.74,西药组相对于中药组的增量成本-效果比为19.57,中西药结合组相对于中药组的增量成本-效果比为14.00。西药组与中西药结合组间治愈率、总有效率均无显著性差异,进行最小成本分析,二者治疗成本分别为455.88、442.08元。结论从药物经济学角度看,保妇康栓联合妇科千金片治疗慢性宫颈炎优于重组人α2a干扰素栓联合克拉霉素片及保妇康栓联合克拉霉素片的治疗方案,保妇康栓联合克拉霉素片组优于重组人α2a干扰素栓联合克拉霉素片。

Analysis of Pharmacoeconomic of Three Therapeutic Schemes for Chronic Cervicitis

Objective To evaluate the pharmacoeconomic efficacy of three therapeutic schemes for chronic cervicitis. Methods 236 patients with chronic cervicitis were randomized to traditional Chinese Medicine group, ADMIN Baofukang suppository and Fukeqianjin tablet, the Western Medicine group, ADMIN Recombinant Human Interferon α2a in suppository form and Clarithromycin tablets, and the Integrative Chinese and Western Medicine group, ADM1N Baofukang suppository and Clarithromycin tablets. And then choose the appropriate pharmacoeconomic analytic methods to analyze. Results The cure rate and total efficiency of the three groups were 48.61%/79.17%, 68.67%/90.36%, 71.60%/93.83%, P〈 0.05. Use the cost - effectiveness analysis, and their cost- effectiveness ratios （C/E） were 2.99, 5.04 and 4.74. As against Chinese Medicine group, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of Western Medicine group and the Integrative Chinese and Western Medicine group were 19.57 and 14.00. The cure rate and the total efficiency of the Western Medicine group and the Integrative Chinese and Western Medicine group was no significant difference, so use the minimum cost analysis, the treatment costs were 455.88, 442.08 yuan. Conclusion In terms ofpharmacoeconomics,Chinese Medicine group is the best scheme in the treatment of chronic cervicitis, the Integrative Chinese and Western Medicine group is better than Western Medicine group.