摘要
目的:比较3种方案治疗脑梗死的临床疗效并进行药物经济学成本-效果分析。方法:采用回顾性调查方法,104例脑梗死病例依据治疗方法的不同分为刺五加注射液组(Ⅰ)、脑蛋白水解物注射液组(Ⅱ)和依达拉奉注射液组(Ⅲ),运用药物经济学的成本-效果分析方法进行评价。结果:3组治疗脑梗死的成本分别为(7 467±1 643.6)元、(8408±2 784.1)元、(10 017±3 124.5)元,总有效率分别为72.97%、74.29%和93.94%,Ⅰ、Ⅱ组相对Ⅲ组患者的增量成本-效果比分别为122.71元和82.68元。结论:依达拉奉注射液治疗脑梗死较刺五加注射液和脑蛋白水解物注射液具有药物经济学优势。
Objective ：To compare the curative effects and pharmacoeconomic costs of three therapeutic schemes in the treatment of cerebral infarction. Methods：By a retrospective survey method, 104 cerebral infarction patients, based on different treatment methods, were divided into three groups of ciwujia injection （ I ）, cerebroprotein hydrolysate injection （ II ） and edaravone injcction （ III ）. A cost-effectiveness analysis in pharmacoeconomics was conducted. Results：The total curative effect ratios of cerebral infarction patients in Groups I , II and III were 72.97% ,74. 29% and 93.94%, respectively. The cost-effectiveness were 7467 ±1643.6,8408 ±2784. 1 arid 10017 ± 3124.5, respectively. The added cost-effectiveness ratios of Groups I and II via Group III were 122. 71 and 82. 68 respectively. Condusion：Among the three therapeutic schemes, the therapy of edaravone injection had pharmacoeconomics advantage over that of ciwujia injection and cerebroprotein hydrolysate injection in treating cerebral infarction.
出处
《药物流行病学杂志》
CAS
2010年第7期411-413,共3页
Chinese Journal of Pharmacoepidemiology
关键词
脑梗死
成本-效果分析
药物经济学
Cerebral infarction
Cost-effectiveness analysis
Pharmacoeconomics
