检索规则说明:AND代表“并且”;OR代表“或者”;NOT代表“不包含”;(注意必须大写,运算符两边需空一格)
检 索 范 例 :范例一: (K=图书馆学 OR K=情报学) AND A=范并思 范例二:J=计算机应用与软件 AND (U=C++ OR U=Basic) NOT M=Visual
机构地区:[1]无锡市第三人民医院儿科,江苏无锡214041 [2]南京中医药大学儿科教研室,江苏南京210046
出 处:《辽宁中医杂志》2013年第6期1188-1189,共2页Liaoning Journal of Traditional Chinese Medicine
摘 要:目的:评价小儿呼吸道合胞病毒肺炎中西医对照治疗的临床疗效和成本-效果比。方法:按中药和西药治疗方法将216例痰热闭肺证型患者分为中药组和西药组,运用药物经济学的成本-效果分析方法进行评价。结果:中药和西药组的愈显率分别为87.83%和79.21%,两组比较无统计学意义(P>0.05),但直接治疗成本有统计学意义(P<0.05),中药组优于西药组。结论:中药与西药治疗小儿呼吸道合胞病毒肺炎疗效相同,但中药治疗有成本优势。Objective:This study is conducted to compare the cost -effect ratio between the traditional Chinese and western medicine treatment of pediatric respiratory syncytial virus pneumonia. Methods :216 of phlegm-heat blocking lung syndrome were allocated to the traditional Chinese medicine treatment ( study group) and western medicine treatment ( control group). The two treatments were compared by cost-effect of ratio. Results : Comparison of efficacy between groups : the efficacy respectively was 87. 83 % and 79.21% in the study and control groups, there was no significant difference (P 〉 0. 05 ). But the direct treatment costs had significant difference ( P 〈 0. 05 ), traditional Chinese medicine group was superior to control group. Conclusion : The two groups have the same efficacy in treating phlegm - heat blocking lung syndrome of RSV pneumonia, but the treatment with traditional Chinese medicine regimen has a cost advantage.
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在链接到云南高校图书馆文献保障联盟下载...
云南高校图书馆联盟文献共享服务平台 版权所有©
您的IP:216.73.216.28