摘要
[目的]探讨微生态制剂临床的合理服用与临床疗效关系。[方法]随机抽取本院2011年1月1日至2011年12月31日的门诊药物治疗处方5112张,对有关用药情况进行统计分析,微生态制剂处方占总处方数342/5112张(6.69%),其中儿科、消化科、急诊内科、其他科室处方分别占比为51.75%、23.39%、13.16%、11.70%。在以上处方中就微生态制剂服用方法(水温和是否与收敛吸附剂混用)随访患者并予统计,选择严格按规定服用273处方(205例)为观察组,未严格按规定服用69处方(52例)为对照组,予两组疗效比较。[结果]观察组临床总有效196例(总有效率95.61%),其中儿科115例(97.46%)、消化科39例(95.12%)、急诊内科23例(92.00%)、其他科室19例(90.48%);对照组临床总有效34例(总有效率65.38%),其中儿科13例(68.42%)、消化科11例(61.11%)、急诊内科7例(77.78%)、其他科室3例(50.00%);两组同样同量微生态制剂使用疗效结果比较,(儿科、消化科、其他科室和急诊内科)观察组与对照组有效率比较,分别为有统计学显著性意义(P<0.01)和有统计学意义(P<0.05)。[结论]微生态制剂应注重服用方法的各自特性,临床合理服用与临床疗效关系密切。
[Objective] To discuss the relationship between the reasonable application and the clinical efficacy ofprobiotics. [Method] Randomly select clinical prescription 5112 pieces, make statistical analysis on related medication, the probiotics occupy 342/5112（6.69%）, among which, the prescriptions paediatrics, Digestive Dep., emergency medicine and other departments occupy respectively 51.75%,23.39%,13.16%,11.70%. Follow up and make statistics on probiotics taking methods, choose strict prescriptions 273 pieces（205 cases） as observation group, other non-strict prescriptions 69（52 cases） as control group, compare their effects. [Result]In observation group, the total effective rate is 95.61%（196 cases ）, among which, the paediatrics 115 cases（97.46%）, digestive dep.39 （95.12%）,emergency medicine 23 （ 92.00% ）,other departments 19 （90.48%） ; for control one, its total effective rate 65.38%（ 34 cases ）, among which, paediatrics 13cases （ 68.42% ）,digestive dep. 11 （ 61.1 1% ）,emergency medicine 7 （77.78%）,other departments 3 （ 50.00% ） ; comparing their effects of the probiotics of same quantity, and also the total effective rates,the results have marked statistical meaning, and statistical meaning for the latter. [Conclusion] Probiotics shall pay attention to taking methods features of themselves; the clinical reasonably taking and effect have close relation.
出处
《浙江中医药大学学报》
CAS
2013年第4期415-417,共3页
Journal of Zhejiang Chinese Medical University
