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
作 者:牛瑞宇
机构地区:[1]中核兰铀公司五O四医院药械科,甘肃兰州730065
出 处:《海南医学院学报》2013年第11期1620-1623,共4页Journal of Hainan Medical University
基 金:中国高校医学期刊临床专项资金项目(112210881)~~
摘 要:目的:探讨管理制度对医疗机构药房退药的影响及帕累托图分析。方法:分析我院2011年药房退药处方的原因及退药处方比例,根据分析结果制定相应的干预制度,随后观察2012年的药房退药处方比例及原因,对2个时间段进行对比研究。结果:干预制度前退药处方比例为1.38%(1 202/87101),住院退药处方比例为0.38%(331/87 101),干预制度后退药处方比例为0.66%(978/148 962),住院退药处方比例为0.20%(300/148 962),住院退药处方在干预前后差异无统计学意义(P>0.05),退药处方干预前后差异显著(P<0.05)。采用帕累托图法对干预制度后退药因素进行分析,药品不良反应(21.7%)、不合理用药(17.3%)和转院治疗(14.3%)为退药的主要因素。结论:管理制度能显著降低医院药房退药处方量,能将退药因素限制在可控范围内。Objective= To explore the impact of management system on drug withdrawal and pareto diagram analysis. Methods: The reason for drug withdrawal and withdrawal proportion in 2011 and 2012 in our hospital was analyzed and compared, to develop appropriate intervention system. Results: The ratio of drug withdrawal prescription was 1.38%(1 202/87 101) before the implementation of the intervention system, 0.38% (331/87 101) in hospitalized patients; it was 0.66% (978/148 962) after the implementa- tion of the intervention system, 0.20%(300/148 962) in hospitalized patients. There was no significant difference in drug withdrawal ratio of hospitalized patients (P〉0.05), nor significant differences before and after the implementation of intervention (P〈0.05). The Pareto diagram analysis was used to analyze drug return reasons, and the three primary reasons were adverse drug reactions, medication unreasonable and referral for treatment. Oonclusions: Management system can significantly reduce the ratio of drug withdrawal, the drug return reasons can be controlled within a reasonable range.
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:216.73.216.38