基于AHP-TOPSIS法评价注射用艾普拉唑钠临床应用的合理性

Evaluation of the Rationality of Clinical Application of Ilaprazole Sodium for Injection based on AHP-TOPSIS Method

目的 建立注射用艾普拉唑钠临床应用的评价标准,为合理用药提供参考依据。方法 随机抽取2021年1月1日~2022年4月30日296例应用注射用艾普拉唑钠的病历,以注射用艾普拉唑钠注射液说明书、指南、专家共识为依据,由相关科室专家制定注射用艾普拉唑钠的评价标准,采用层次分析法(AHP)计算各项指标的权重系数,利用加权的逼近理想值排序法(TOPSIS)对病历进行评价,根据相对接近度Ci把病历分为甲等、乙等、丙等3个等级。结果 注射用艾普拉唑钠用药不适宜的情况主要包括无适应证用药、溶媒量选用不适宜、未进行适当的用药监护、超疗程用药以及未进行适当的经济学考量,本次纳入的296例患者中,甲等病历84份(占比28.4%),乙等8份(占比2.7%),丙等204份(占比68.9%)。结论 注射用艾普拉唑钠的使用存在较多不合理的情况,仍需加强管理,而借助AHP-TOPSIS法能整体分析用药情况,点评结果更为全面、科学、客观。

OBJECTIVE To establish the evaluation standard of clinical application of iprazole sodium for injection, so as to provide reference basis for rational drug use. METHODS 296 medical records of ilaprazole sodium for injection from January 1,2021 to April 30,2022 were selected randomly. Based on drug label, relevant drug guidelines or expert consensus issued by experts for ilaprazole sodium for injection, the evaluation criterion of ilaprazole sodium for injection was formulated. The criterion used the analytic hierarchy process(AHP) to calculate the weight coefficient of each index, and used the weighted approximate ideal value ranking method(TOPSIS) to evaluate the medical records. Medical records were divided into three grades: A,B,and C by relative proximity(Ci). RESULTS Inappropriate use of ilaprazole sodium for injection mainly included non-indicative use of ilaprazole sodium, inappropriate choice of vehicle dosage, lack of proper medication monitoring, over-treatment medication, and lack of appropriate economic considerations. 296 cases were included in this study. Among the patients, there were 84 grade A medical records(accounting for 28.4%),8 grade B medical records(accounting for 2.7%),and 204 grade C medical records(accounting for 68.9%). CONCLUSION There are many cases of irrational drug use in the use of iprazole sodium for injection, and the management still needs to be strengthened. With the help of AHP-TOPSIS,the use of medical records can be analyzed as a whole, and the evaluation results are more comprehensive, scientific and objective.