教学医院及职工医院高血压患者用药情况调查分析

Investigation and Analysis of Hypertensive Patients Taking Medicines in the University and Staff & Workers Hospitals

目的:了解教学医院和职工医院高血压患者常用降压药物的种类和降压治疗方案。方法:抽查2004 年8-12月上述两所医院各1000例高血压患者门诊处方,统计分析降压药物的使用及治疗方案。结果:上述两所医院钙拮抗药(CCB)使用率分别为38．3％和45．4％(P<0．001);血管紧张素转换酶抑制药(ACEI)使用率分别为 24．7％和16．6％(P<0．001);利尿药使用率分别为12％和5．6％(P<0．001);β受体阻断药使用率分别为18．3％和26．7％(P<0．001);血管紧张素Ⅱ受体阻断药(ARB)分别为6．3％和2．7％(P<0．001);α受体阻断药使用率分别为0．3％和3．0％(P<0．001)。结论:两所医院门诊高血压患者降压药物应用种类基本符合JNC-Ⅶ和欧洲高血压治疗指南。前者的降压治疗方案比后者更合理。

Objective： To investigate the prescriptions of 1000 outpatients with hypertension in the university and staff ＆ workers hospitals respectively, to know the classes of antihypertensive drugs in the daily use and the antihypertensive regimes in these two hospitals, and to assess whether they were in accordance with the international hypertension therapy guidelines. Method： The prescriptions of selected 1000 outpatients with hypertension visiting the above two hospitals respectively from August to December of 2004 were analyzed. Result： The use ratio of calcium channel blockers （CCB） in the university and staff ＆ workers hospitals was 38. 5% versus 45.4% respectively, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors （ACEI）24. 7% versus 16. 6%, that of diuretics, 12.0% versus 5.6%, that of β-adrenergie receptor blockers （ β-Blocker） , 18. 3% versus 26. 7% , that of angiotensin Ⅱ -receptor blockers（ARB） , 6.3% versus 2. 7% ,and that of α-adrenergic receptor blockers（α Blocket） , 0. 3% versus 3. 0%, As compared with the patients （60.6% versus 57, 2% ） receiving monotherapy, the rest （39.4% versus 43. 8% ） took the combination of two or more than two classes of antihypertensive drugs. Conclusion ： The classes of antihypertensive drugs prescribed to the outpatients with hypertension in the university and staff ＆ workers hospitals were in accordance with the JNC-Ⅶ and 2003 European society of hypertension-European society of cardiology guidelines for the management of arterial hypertension in general, more with the antihypertensive regimes in the university hospital than those in the latter. But there were still some common problems in these two hospitals. For example, the application of diuretics was not as extensive as it could be~ Possibly existing insufficient medication was another problem,