论文部分内容阅读
目的针对多瑞吉、美施康定和奥施康定治疗晚期癌痛的成本-效果(CEA)进行分析。方法选取江苏省肿瘤医院2014年收治的晚期癌痛患者40例,分为多瑞吉组13例,美施康定组13例与奥施康定组14例。多瑞吉为外用药,贴于皮肤,初始剂量控制在25~50μg/ml,72h后换帖;美施康定为口服药物,起始剂量为30mg,12h/次;奥施康定起始剂量20mg,12h/次。3组均按照患者的具体情况来调整剂量,直到达到患者的要求。若在治疗中出现突发性疼痛加剧可口服吗啡,如患者出现胃肠道反应如便秘或者恶心等,应当对症处理。结果 3组患者总有效率比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。3组患者不良反应发生率比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。3组CEA比较,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论多瑞吉、美施康定和奥施康定的镇痛效果无差异,成本效果比表明美施康定最佳,奥施康定次之。
OBJECTIVE: To analyze the cost-effectiveness (CEA) of Durative, Docetaxel, and Oxstatin in the treatment of advanced cancer pain. Methods Totally 40 patients with advanced cancer pain who were admitted to Cancer Hospital of Jiangsu Province in 2014 were divided into three groups: Dorothy group (13 cases), Meiscosteon group (13 cases) and Oxycodin group (14 cases). Doric used as topical, affixed to the skin, the initial dose control in 25 ~ 50μg / ml, 72h after the change of posts; Meishen Kangding oral drugs, the initial dose of 30mg, 12h / times; OxyClock initial dose of 20mg , 12h / time. The three groups were adjusted according to the patient’s specific conditions until the patient’s requirements were met. If the treatment of sudden pain exacerbated oral morphine, such as gastrointestinal reactions such as patients with constipation or nausea, should be symptomatic treatment. Results There was no significant difference in the total effective rate between the three groups (P> 0.05). There was no significant difference in the incidence of adverse reactions between the three groups (P> 0.05). The CEA of 3 groups showed significant difference (P <0.05). Conclusion There are no differences in the analgesic effect of Doric Ji, Meishi Kangding and Oxycodin, and the cost-effectiveness ratio shows that Meishi Kangding is the best, followed by Oxycodin.