论文部分内容阅读
目的:评价两个厂家生产的厄贝沙坦片治疗早期糖尿病肾病(DN)的成本-效果关系。方法:回顾本院2008～2009年早期DN患者,选择90例患者作为研究对象,将其分为2组。A组(45例)给予厄贝沙坦(吉加,江苏恒瑞医药有限公司,给药剂量:150 mg·d~(-1))。B组(45例)给予厄贝沙坦(安博维,杭州赛诺菲圣德堡民生制药有限公司,给药剂量:150 mg·d~(-1))。2组疗程均为8周,用药后对两组TC、TG、糖化血红蛋白(Hblc,%)、尿蛋白排泄率(VAER,μg·min~(-1))进行综合评价,再运用药物经济学方法进行成本-效果分析。结果:A组总有效率88.8%,B组总有效率92%(P>0.05)。A组成本145.6元,B组成本302.4元;每增加一个效果单位B组比A组多花49元。结论:A组产生单位效果所需成本比B组低,从经济学角度考虑,应优先使用吉加。
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness relationship of irbesartan tablets produced by the two manufacturers for the treatment of early diabetic nephropathy (DN). Methods: To review the early stage of DN patients from 2008 to 2009 in our hospital, 90 patients were selected as the research object and divided into two groups. Group A (45 cases) was given irbesartan (Jiage, Jiangsu Hengrui Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., dosage: 150 mg · d -1). Group B (45 cases) was given irbesartan (Ambow, Hangzhou Sanofi Sanderson Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., dosage: 150 mg · d -1). The course of treatment was 8 weeks in both groups. The TC, TG, Hblc, and urinary protein excretion rate (VAER, μg · min ~ (-1)) of two groups were evaluated comprehensively after treatment, Method for cost-effectiveness analysis. Results: The total effective rate was 88.8% in group A and 92% in group B (P> 0.05). A group costs 145.6 yuan, B group costs 302.4 yuan; For each additional unit of effect B group A spend 49 yuan more. Conclusion: The cost of producing unit effect in group A is lower than that in group B. From the economic point of view, the cost should be given priority.