摘要
目的比较带量集中采购(简称集采)前后阿司匹林和替格瑞洛等五联药物用于冠状动脉粥样硬化性心脏病患者药物涂层支架植入术后治疗的疗效和经济性。方法收集2018年1—6月和2022年1—6月诊断为冠状动脉粥样硬化性心脏病并行冠状动脉药物洗脱支架植入术的107例患者的临床资料,依据术后治疗药物是否使用集采药品分为非集采组31例,予以阿司匹林、替格瑞洛、琥珀酸美托洛尔、瑞舒伐他汀和厄贝沙坦五联药物;集采组76例,予以集采阿司匹林、集采替格瑞洛、琥珀酸美托洛尔、集采瑞舒伐他汀和集采厄贝沙坦五联药物。比较集采组和非集采组的临床疗效、成本-效果、出血发生率,并进行敏感性分析。结果集采组和非集采组治疗有效率分别为97.37%和96.77%,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);集采组CER显著优于非集采组(P<0.05),集采组与非集采组比较的增量成本-效果比(ICER)为-12476.9元;敏感性分析结果与成本-效果分析结果一致;非集采组和集采组随访12个月期间无出血相关事件(需就医或住院)发生,两组出血事件发生率比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论集采和非集采阿司匹林和替格瑞洛等五联治疗方案的效果无显著差异,但集采阿司匹林和替格瑞洛等五联治疗方案的经济性更优,为优选方案。
Objective To compare the efficacy and economy of five-drug combination of aspirin and ticagrelor before and after the implantation of drug-coated stents in patients with coronary heart disease.Methods Clinical data of 107 patients diagnosed with coronary atherosclerotic heart disease combined with coronary artery drug-eluting stent implantation from January to June 2018 and from January to June 2022 were collected.The patients were divided into non-group(31 cases)according to whether or not group drugs were used.The group was given aspirin,ticagrelor,metoprolol succinate,rosuvastatin and irbesartan.A total of 76 cases were collected in the group of aspirin,ticagrelor,metoprolol succinate,rosuvastatin and irbesartan.The clinical efficacy,cost-effectiveness and incidence of bleeding were compared between the collection group and the non-collection group,and sensitivity analysis was performed.Results The effective rate was 97.37%and 96.77%,respectively,with no statistical significance(P>0.05).The CER in the mining group was significantly better than that in the non-mining group(P<0.05),and the ICER between the mining group and the non-mining group was-12476.9 yuan.The results of sensitivity analysis were consistent with those of cost-effectiveness analysis.During the follow-up period of 12 months,no bleeding related events(requiring medical treatment or hospitalization)occurred between the non-collection group and the collection group,and there was no statistical significance in the incidence of bleeding events between the two groups(P>0.05).Conclusion There is no significant difference in the efficacy between the centralized group and the non-centralized group with five combination treatment schemes,but the economy of of the centralized group was better,so it was the best choice.
作者
张丽琼
林柳任
田源
耿兴星
田腊梅
ZHANG Li-Qiong;LIN Liu-Ren;TIAN Yuan;GENG Xing-xing;TIAN La-Mei(Department of Pharmacology,The Second People's Hospital of Qujing City,Qujing 655000,China)
出处
《中国药物经济学》
2023年第8期16-21,共6页
China Journal of Pharmaceutical Economics
