南方医科大学学报
南方醫科大學學報
남방의과대학학보
JOURNAL OF SOUTHERN MEDICAL UNIVERSITY
2009年
11期
2182-2186
,共5页
周玲玲%许良智%刘宏伟%张静%刘颖%刘晓芳%唐柳林%庄静%刘小先%乔林
週玲玲%許良智%劉宏偉%張靜%劉穎%劉曉芳%唐柳林%莊靜%劉小先%喬林
주령령%허량지%류굉위%장정%류영%류효방%당류림%장정%류소선%교림
绝经早期%倍美力%坤泰胶囊%生存质量%成本效用分析
絕經早期%倍美力%坤泰膠囊%生存質量%成本效用分析
절경조기%배미력%곤태효낭%생존질량%성본효용분석
early postmenopause%Premarin%Kuntai capsule%quality-of-life%cost-utility analysis
目的 评价倍美力和坤泰胶囊对绝经早期妇女生存质量的影响.并进行成本效用分析.方法 将绝经早期的绝经后综合征患者随机分为低剂量倍美力组(0.3 mg/d与0.6mg/d交替使用,n=29)和坤泰组(4g/d,n=28),疗程1年,每3个月随访一次,评价绝经期生存质量,并采用等级尺度法提取效用值以进行成本效用分析.结果 两组间治疗后各时间点的生存质量评分均无差异(P>0.05);而各组内的生存质量在治疗1年后均较治疗前升高(P<0.05),但坤泰起效晚于倍美力;倍美力组和坤泰组的质量调整生命年的成本分别为13581.45元/年和25105.12元/年.增量成本效用分析和敏感性分析表明坤泰组的花费高于倍美力组.符合方案集分析与意向性分析的结果一致.结论 低剂量倍美力和中成药坤泰均可有效改善绝经早期的绝经后综合征患者的生存质量;但1年内服用坤泰成本较高.
目的 評價倍美力和坤泰膠囊對絕經早期婦女生存質量的影響.併進行成本效用分析.方法 將絕經早期的絕經後綜閤徵患者隨機分為低劑量倍美力組(0.3 mg/d與0.6mg/d交替使用,n=29)和坤泰組(4g/d,n=28),療程1年,每3箇月隨訪一次,評價絕經期生存質量,併採用等級呎度法提取效用值以進行成本效用分析.結果 兩組間治療後各時間點的生存質量評分均無差異(P>0.05);而各組內的生存質量在治療1年後均較治療前升高(P<0.05),但坤泰起效晚于倍美力;倍美力組和坤泰組的質量調整生命年的成本分彆為13581.45元/年和25105.12元/年.增量成本效用分析和敏感性分析錶明坤泰組的花費高于倍美力組.符閤方案集分析與意嚮性分析的結果一緻.結論 低劑量倍美力和中成藥坤泰均可有效改善絕經早期的絕經後綜閤徵患者的生存質量;但1年內服用坤泰成本較高.
목적 평개배미력화곤태효낭대절경조기부녀생존질량적영향.병진행성본효용분석.방법 장절경조기적절경후종합정환자수궤분위저제량배미력조(0.3 mg/d여0.6mg/d교체사용,n=29)화곤태조(4g/d,n=28),료정1년,매3개월수방일차,평개절경기생존질량,병채용등급척도법제취효용치이진행성본효용분석.결과 량조간치료후각시간점적생존질량평분균무차이(P>0.05);이각조내적생존질량재치료1년후균교치료전승고(P<0.05),단곤태기효만우배미력;배미력조화곤태조적질량조정생명년적성본분별위13581.45원/년화25105.12원/년.증량성본효용분석화민감성분석표명곤태조적화비고우배미력조.부합방안집분석여의향성분석적결과일치.결론 저제량배미력화중성약곤태균가유효개선절경조기적절경후종합정환자적생존질량;단1년내복용곤태성본교고.
Objective To evaluate the effect of Premarin and Kuntai capsule (a traditional Chinese patent medicine) on the quality of life (QOL) and their cost-utility in early postmenopausal women. Methods Fifty-seven women with menopausal syndrome in the early postmenopausal stage were randomly allocated into Premarin group (0.3 mg/day and 0.6 mg/day alternately, n=29) and Kuntai group (4 g/day, n=28). The therapies lasted for one year and the patients were followed up every 3 months. The QOL of the patients was evaluated and the utility scores were obtained from rating scale to conduct a cost-utility analysis (CUA). Results At each follow-up examination, no significant difference was found in the QOL between the two groups (P>0.05). The QOL obviously increased after the 1-year-long therapy in both the groups, and Kuntai required longer treatment time than Premarin to take effect. The cost-utility ratio of Premarin and Kuntai were 13581.45 yuan/QALY (quality adjusted life year) and 25105.12 yuan/QALY, respectively. Both incremental cost analysis and sensitivity analysis showed that Kuntai was more costly than Premarin. The result of per-protocol analysis was consistent with that of intention-to-treat analysis. Conclusion At early stage of menopause, the QOL of women with menopausal syndrome can be significantly improved by low-dose Premarin and Kuntai capsule, but the latter is more costly.