论文部分内容阅读
目的:分析临床药师对I类切口手术患者围术期抗菌药物合理使用的干预效果,探讨I类切口手术患者围术期抗菌药物的使用对术后切口感染发生率之间的关系,为规范I类切口手术围术期抗菌药物的合理使用提供参考。方法:分别抽取医院2011年1—12月间(非干预组)和2013年1月—2014年12月间(干预组)的I类切口手术出院患者病历共771份,分析围术期预防性使用抗茵药物的合理性及术后切口感染的发生率。结果:I类切口手术患者围术期抗茵药物预防使用率经干预后,干预组抗菌药物的使用率为37.22%明显低于非干预组为95.42%(P<0.05);干预组围术期用药指征、抗菌药物选择、用法用量、术前用药时机、用药疗程和联合用药等指标的合理性均显著高于非干预组(P<0.05)。结论:临床药师干预I类切口手术围术期抗茵药物的使用对围术期抗菌药物合理使用起到了积极的推动作用。
OBJECTIVE: To analyze the intervention effect of clinical pharmacists on the rational use of perioperative antibacterials in patients with type I incision surgery, and to explore the relationship between the use of perioperative antibacterials in patients with type I incision surgery and the incidence of postoperative incision infection, Class incision surgery perioperative rational use of antibiotics provide a reference. Methods: A total of 771 medical records of type I patients discharged from hospital between January-December 2011 (non-intervention group) and January 2013-December 2014 (intervention group) were respectively collected for analysis of perioperative prophylactic The rationality of using anti-inflammatory drugs and the incidence of incision infection. Results: The intervention rate of perioperative anti-drug use in patients with type I incision surgery was significantly lower than that of non-intervention group (37.22% vs 95.42%, P <0.05) Drug indications, antibacterial drug selection, dosage, preoperative medication timing, medication and combination therapy and other indicators of rationality were significantly higher than non-intervention group (P <0.05). Conclusion: The intervention of clinical pharmacists in class I incision perioperative use of anti-inflammatory drugs on the rational use of perioperative antibiotics has played a positive role in promoting.