北京市医改后海淀区与朝阳区社区卫生服务中心处方点评结果对比分析
|
摘要
目的:比较北京市医改后海淀区与朝阳区社区卫生服务中心处方点评的结果,为医改后提高北京市社区卫生服务中心处方质量和合理用药水平提供参考。方法:随机抽取2017年4月医改后海淀区社区卫生服务中心门诊处方10 510张、朝阳区社区卫生服务中心门诊处方10 476张,按照处方点评标准对其进行点评,并对用药情况进行对比分析。结果:海淀区和朝阳区社区卫生服务中心处方平均金额约为160元,两区之间的差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);海淀区处方中国家基本药物使用率、补充基本药物使用率明显高于朝阳区,差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05);海淀区处方不合理率明显高于朝阳区,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论:通过医改后海淀区与朝阳区社区卫生服务中心处方点评结果的对比,发现两区处方点评标准的差异较大,下一步应进一步加强药师的干预,并且完善处方点评的标准,确保患者用药安全。
ABSRACT OBJECTIVE: To compared the results of prescription review in community healthcare centers in Haidian district and Chaoyang district after Beijing medical reform, so as to provide references for promoting quality of prescription and rational drug application in community healthcare centers in Beijing. METHODS: 10 510 outpatient prescriptions in community healthcare centers of Haidian district and 10 476 outpatient prescriptions in community healthcare centers of Chaoyang district in Apr. 2017 were randomly extracted to be reviewed according to the prescription review standard and analyzed in terms of drug application. RESULTS: The average prescription amount of Haidian district and Chaoyang district was about 160 yuan, the difference between the two districts had no statistical significance(P>0.05); the application rates of national essential drugs and supplementary essential drugs in Haidian district were significantly higher than those of Chaoyang district, with statistically significant differences(P<0.05); the irrational rate of prescriptions in Haidian district was significantly higher than that of Chaoyang district, with statistically significant differences(P<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: After comparing the results of prescription review between community healthcare centers in Haidian district and Chaoyang district after medical reform, it is found that the difference of prescription review standards between the two districts is large, the intervention of pharmacists should be further strengthened, and the standards of prescription review needs to be improved to ensure the safety of drug application.
ABSRACT OBJECTIVE: To compared the results of prescription review in community healthcare centers in Haidian district and Chaoyang district after Beijing medical reform, so as to provide references for promoting quality of prescription and rational drug application in community healthcare centers in Beijing. METHODS: 10 510 outpatient prescriptions in community healthcare centers of Haidian district and 10 476 outpatient prescriptions in community healthcare centers of Chaoyang district in Apr. 2017 were randomly extracted to be reviewed according to the prescription review standard and analyzed in terms of drug application. RESULTS: The average prescription amount of Haidian district and Chaoyang district was about 160 yuan, the difference between the two districts had no statistical significance(P>0.05); the application rates of national essential drugs and supplementary essential drugs in Haidian district were significantly higher than those of Chaoyang district, with statistically significant differences(P<0.05); the irrational rate of prescriptions in Haidian district was significantly higher than that of Chaoyang district, with statistically significant differences(P<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: After comparing the results of prescription review between community healthcare centers in Haidian district and Chaoyang district after medical reform, it is found that the difference of prescription review standards between the two districts is large, the intervention of pharmacists should be further strengthened, and the standards of prescription review needs to be improved to ensure the safety of drug application.
引文
[1] 耿凤霞.门诊处方点评及合理用药情况思考[J].世界最新医学信息文摘,2017,17(34):17-18.
[2] 《中国国家处方集》编委会.中国国家处方集[M].北京:人民军医出版社,2010:21-26.
[3] 陈新谦,金有豫,汤光.新编药物学[M].17版.北京:人民卫生出版社,2011:86-98.
[4] 吴迪,王真.某三甲医院2014年度门诊处方点评结果与分析[J].重庆医学,2017,46(18):2554-2555.
[5] 黄迎春,林建松.我院2016年门诊处方点评与分析[J].海峡药学,2017,29(8):241-242.
[6] 欧阳旭,杨阳,郑珊珊,等.我院抗菌药物处方点评模式建立和药师作用分析[J].中国药学杂志,2017,52(9):793-796.
[7] 陈红梅,吴海丹.处方点评对临床处方用药合理性及其不合理的原因分析[J].抗感染药学,2017,14(2):279-281.
[8] 常晓红,张冰.医院中药注射剂专项处方点评及干预[J].中华中医药杂志,2017,32(1):88-91.
[9] 李红霞.2016年度我院门诊中药处方点评及干预措施[J].疾病监测与控制,2017,11(6):469-471.
[10] 毕伟彬.我院门诊处方点评干预成效分析[J].中国药业,2017,26(3):78-79.
[11] 关国娴.我院门诊处方点评与不合理处方分析[J].临床合理用药杂志,2017,10(14):92-93.
[12] 甄健存,边宝生,孔繁翠,等.区域性处方点评对临床合理用药的效果评估[J].中华医院管理杂志,2015,31(7):531-533.
[13] 曹晓璇,朴光春,金红花.临床药师处方点评可以促进医院合理用药[J].中国医药指南,2017,15(16):287-288.
[14] 孔其芳,赵奇江.处方点评制度执行模式的探讨[J].中国社区医师,2017,33(22):12-13,15.
[15] 吕明非.规范处方点评促进医疗机构合理用药[J].临床医药文献电子杂志,2017,4(9):1760-1761.
[2] 《中国国家处方集》编委会.中国国家处方集[M].北京:人民军医出版社,2010:21-26.
[3] 陈新谦,金有豫,汤光.新编药物学[M].17版.北京:人民卫生出版社,2011:86-98.
[4] 吴迪,王真.某三甲医院2014年度门诊处方点评结果与分析[J].重庆医学,2017,46(18):2554-2555.
[5] 黄迎春,林建松.我院2016年门诊处方点评与分析[J].海峡药学,2017,29(8):241-242.
[6] 欧阳旭,杨阳,郑珊珊,等.我院抗菌药物处方点评模式建立和药师作用分析[J].中国药学杂志,2017,52(9):793-796.
[7] 陈红梅,吴海丹.处方点评对临床处方用药合理性及其不合理的原因分析[J].抗感染药学,2017,14(2):279-281.
[8] 常晓红,张冰.医院中药注射剂专项处方点评及干预[J].中华中医药杂志,2017,32(1):88-91.
[9] 李红霞.2016年度我院门诊中药处方点评及干预措施[J].疾病监测与控制,2017,11(6):469-471.
[10] 毕伟彬.我院门诊处方点评干预成效分析[J].中国药业,2017,26(3):78-79.
[11] 关国娴.我院门诊处方点评与不合理处方分析[J].临床合理用药杂志,2017,10(14):92-93.
[12] 甄健存,边宝生,孔繁翠,等.区域性处方点评对临床合理用药的效果评估[J].中华医院管理杂志,2015,31(7):531-533.
[13] 曹晓璇,朴光春,金红花.临床药师处方点评可以促进医院合理用药[J].中国医药指南,2017,15(16):287-288.
[14] 孔其芳,赵奇江.处方点评制度执行模式的探讨[J].中国社区医师,2017,33(22):12-13,15.
[15] 吕明非.规范处方点评促进医疗机构合理用药[J].临床医药文献电子杂志,2017,4(9):1760-1761.