药学干预前后我院抗菌药物使用强度分析  

AUD Analysis of the Antibiotics Use Before and After Interference in Our Hospital

作　　者：郝立志[1] 任小贺[1] 宫淑艳[1] 安呈华[1] 

机构地区：[1]首都医科大学密云教学医院药剂科,北京101500

出　　处：《药品评价》2014年第18期41-44,共4页Drug Evaluation

摘　　要：目的:了解在药学干预前后我院住院患者抗菌药物使用强度(AUD)的变化。方法:以限定日剂量(DDD)为单位,计算抗菌药物使用强度(AUD)并进行分析。结果:药学干预前、后我院住院患者抗菌药物的AUD分别为61.90DDD/100人/天、47.54DDD/100人/天;药学干预前,我院二代头孢菌素、硝咪唑类、三代头孢菌素的AUD列前3位,干预后二代头孢菌素、头霉素类、硝基咪唑类的AUD列前3位;我院AUD排列前10位的抗菌药物为奥硝唑注射液、头孢呋辛钠、头孢唑肟钠、头孢美唑钠、头孢西丁钠、左氧氟沙星注射液等;药学干预后大部分临床科室的抗菌药物使用强度均下降。结论:药学干预前我院抗菌药物的使用存在用药剂量过大、用药疗程过长、选药不当等问题,应进一步加强抗菌药物应用的监督管理。Objective： The study was conducted in order to have a clear knowledge of the AUD of antibiotics taken by patients in Miyun Hospital before and after pharmaceutical intervention. Methods： Calculate and analyze the AUD of antibiotics taken by patients in Miyun Hospital by the unit of DDD. Results： Before pharmaceutical intervention, second-generation cephalosporins, nitrate imidazole, and third-generation cephalosporins ranked the first 3 in AUD, the antibiotic AUD was 61.90 DDD/100 person/day; While after pharmaceutical intervention, second-generation cephalosporins, and cephamycins, nitrate imidazole ranked the first 3, AUD has dropped to 47.54 DDD/100 person/day. The antibiotic AUD has obviously decreased in most departments in our hospital due to pharmaceutical intervention. Conclusion： Before pharmaceutical intervention, there were some problems on the application of antibiotics in our hospital, including high doses, long course of treatment, and improper choice of antibiotics. Supervision of application of antibiotics should be further emphasized.

关 键 词：抗菌药物 使用强度 药学干预 不合理用药 

分 类 号：R96[医药卫生—药理学]