我院2016年不合理处方分析及改进措施探讨
Analysis and improvement measures of irrational prescriptions in our hospital in 2016
隋玉辉 1丁洁2
作者信息
- 1. 清华大学医院 药剂科,北京 100084
- 2. 辽宁省盘锦市辽河油田总医院 药学部,辽宁 盘锦 124010
- 折叠
摘要
目的 分析本院2016年不合理处方、改进措施及改进效果.方法 随机抽取本院2016年门诊和急诊处方7200张进行研究,其中2016年1月~6月3600张处方为干预前组,2016年7月~12月3600张处方为干预后组.首先对干预前组处方进行点评,根据点评结果和查阅文献确定干预措施,观察2组单张处方用药种类、处方平均金额、抗生素使用率、不合理处方率.结果 干预后组单张处方用药种类(2.27种vs.1.93种)、处方平均金额(171.74元vs.152.86元)、抗生素使用率(34.39%vs.25.47%)、不合理处方率(9.36%vs.2.14%)均显著低于干预前组(P<0.05).结论 处方点评和针对性干预可降低不合理用药发生率,促进临床合理用药,具有重要临床应用价值.
Abstract
Objective To analyze the irrational prescriptions, improvement measures and improvement effect in our hospital in 2016. Methods 7200 outpatient and emergency prescriptions of our hospital in 2016 were randomly selected to study. 3600 prescriptions from January 2016 to June were selected as pre intervention group, and 3600 prescriptions from July 2016 to December were selected as post intervention group,First of all, the prescription of the pre intervention group was reviewed, according to the results of the review and literature review to determine the intervention measures. The types of prescription drugs, average amount of prescription, rate of antibiotic use and unreasonable prescription rate of two groups were observed. Results Types of prescription drugs(2.27 kinds vs. 1.93 kinds), average amount of prescription(171.74 yuan vs. 152.86 yuan), rate of antibiotic use(34.39% vs. 25.47%) and unreasonable prescription rate (9.36% vs. 2.14%)of post intervention group were significantly lower than those of pre intervention group(P<0.05). Conclusion The prescription comment and targeted intervention can reduce the incidence of irrational drug use and promote rational drug use in clinic, which has important clinical value.
关键词
不合理处方/处方点评/改进措施Key words
irrational prescription/prescription comment/improvement measures引用本文复制引用
出版年
2017
NETL
NSTL
维普
万方数据