3种用药方案治疗急性脑梗死的成本-效果分析  

Cost-effectiveness Analysis of Three Therapeutic Regimes for Acute Cerebral Infarction

作　　者：杨文波[1] 

机构地区：[1]延边大学附属医院药剂科,延吉市133000

出　　处：《中国药房》2011年第42期3939-3941,共3页China Pharmacy

摘　　要：目的:比较3种用药方案治疗急性脑梗死的经济学效果。方法:92例急性脑梗死住院患者按照不同药物治疗方案分为A、B、C组,A组给予丁苯酞软胶囊,B组给予苯磺酸氨氯地平片、阿司匹林肠溶片和胞磷胆碱胶囊,C组给予银杏叶片。治疗14d后观察疗效,并运用成本-效果法进行分析。结果:A、B、C组的显效率分别为78.57%、66.67%、48.39%,成本分别为8860.71、8107.45、7854.65元,成本-效果比分别为11277.47、12160.57、16231.97,A、B组相对于C组的增量成本-效果比分别为3333.53、1382.93。结论:从药物经济学角度分析,B组方案治疗急性脑梗死较佳。OBJECTIVE： To compare the pharmacoeconomic effect of three therapeutic regimes for acute cerebral infarction （ACI）. METHODS： 92 cases of ACI were divided into group A, group B and group C according to therapeutic regimes. Group A was treated with Butylphthalide soft capsules, group B Amlodipine besylate tablets, Aspirin enteric-coated tablets and Citicoline sodium capsules, and group C Ginkgo tablets respectively. The curative efficacies were observed to analyze cost-effectiveness after 14 days of treatment. RESULTS： The effective rates of group A, group B and group C were 78.57%, 66.67% and 48.39%. The costs were 8 860.71 yuan, 8 107.45 yuan and 7 854.65 yuan. The cost-effectiveness ratios were 11 277.47, 12 160.57 and 16 231.97, respectively. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of group A and group B were 3 333.53 and 1 382.93, compared with group C. CONCLUSION： From the perspective of pharmacoeconomics, Group B is optimal in the treatment of ACI .

关 键 词：急性脑梗死 丁苯酞软胶囊 阿司匹林肠溶片 氨氯地平片 胞磷胆碱胶囊 银杏叶片 成本-效果分析 

分 类 号：R956[医药卫生—药学] R743.33