论文部分内容阅读
目的:比较门诊患者抗菌药物干预前后临床用药指标,探讨药学干预对抗菌药物临床用药的价值。方法:抽取2016年1—12月间门诊患者抗菌药物用药处方240张,实施药学干预前(2016年1—6月)120张和干预后(2016年7—12月)120张,比较干预前后用药处方中抗菌药物用药的合理性以及不合理用药的类型及构成比、抗菌药物使用时间及利用指数、用药种类和用药前菌检或药敏试验的百分率。结果:药学干预实施前后处方中不合理用药率分别为20.83%和4.17%,药学干预实施后显著低于药学干预实施前(P<0.05);药学干预实施后处方中抗菌药物的使用时间大大缩短,用药种类减少,降低了药物利用指数,用药前菌检或药敏试验的应用比例升高,均显著优于药学干预实施前(P<0.05)。结论:药学干预后用药处方中抗菌药物使用时间大大缩短,用药种类减少,药物利用指数下降,用药前菌检或药敏试验的送检率逐渐上升。
Objective: To compare the clinical medication index before and after the antibacterial drug intervention in outpatients, and to explore the value of pharmacy intervention on the clinical medication of antibacterial drugs. Methods: A total of 240 prescriptions for antibiotics were collected from outpatients between January and December in 2016. Before intervention (January-June 2016) and after intervention (July-December 2016), 120 were taken. Before and after the intervention Drug prescriptions in the rational use of antimicrobial drugs and the type and composition of irrational drug use, antibacterial drug use time and the use of index, the type of medication and medication before the drug test or susceptibility testing percentage. Results: The rate of irrational drug use was 20.83% and 4.17% respectively before and after the implementation of the drug intervention. The effect of the drug was significantly lower than that before the intervention (P <0.05) (P <0.05). The drug use index decreased, drug use index decreased, and the application proportion of drug test or drug susceptibility test increased before and after drug administration. Conclusion: The time of using antimicrobial drugs in the prescriptions after the medical intervention is greatly shortened, the types of the drugs used are decreased, the drug utilization index is decreased, and the delivery rate of the bacteria test or the drug susceptibility test before the drug is gradually increased.