静脉药物配置不合理及干预分析

Unreasonable intravenous drug configuration and intervention analysis

目的探究静脉药物配置不合理情况及干预措施。方法从本院于2015年1月至2015年6月选择1283份未实施药师临床干预的静脉输液医嘱处方(干预前),另选取本院于2018年1月至2018年6月选择1283份已实施药师临床干预的静脉输液医嘱处方(干预后),分析静脉药物配置不合理情况以及临床干预效果。结果干预前1283份未实施临床干预的静脉输液医嘱处方中,有34份静脉药物配置不合理,占2.65%(34/1283),主要包括医嘱输入错误、溶酶不合理、用法用量不合理、联合用药不合理、配伍禁忌、药物选择不合理等;实施药师临床干预后,有18份静脉药物配置不合理,占1.40%(18/1283);实施药师临床干预后的静脉药物配置不合理率明显低于干预前(x^2=5.0249,P=0.0250)。结论静脉药物配置不合理情况进行药师干预,便于减少不合理用药情况,提高临床合理用药的水平,保证患者的身体健康。

Objective To explore the unreasonable situation of intravenous drug allocation and intervention measures. Methods From January 2015 to June 2015, 1 283 intravenous infusion prescriptions without clinical intervention were selected, and 1 283 intravenous infusion prescriptions with clinical intervention were selected from January 2018 to June 2018. Effect of clinical intervention. Results Among 1 283 intravenous infusion prescriptions without clinical intervention, 2.65%(34/1 283) were unreasonable, including incorrect medical order input, unreasonable lysozyme, unreasonable usage and dosage, unreasonable combination of drugs, incompatibility taboos and unreasonable drug selection. After intervention, 18 cases (1.40%) of intravenous drug allocation were unreasonable, and the unreasonable rate of intravenous drug allocation after clinical intervention was significantly lower than that before intervention (x^2=5.024 9, P=0.025 0). Conclusion The intervention of pharmacists in the case of unreasonable intravenous drug allocation can reduce unreasonable drug use, improve the level of rational drug use in clinic, and ensure the health of patients.