CAJ | 학술논문

目的探讨四种药物治疗原发性高血压的经济成本与效果.方法 160例原发性高血压患者,随机分为贝那普利组40例、培哚普利组4J0例、氨氯地平组40例和尼群地平组40例,运用药物经济学的成本-效果分析进行评价.结果四组降压总有效率比较,差异无统计学意义(均P>0.05);四组治疗前后症状总积分比较,差异均有统计学意义(均P<0.05);培哚普利费用低于贝那普利.结论四种药物治疗原发性高血压疗效相似,但培哚普利费用低.
목적 탐토사충약물치료원발성고혈압적경제성본여효과.방법 160례원발성고혈압환자,수궤분위패나보리조40례、배타보리조4J0례、안록지평조40례화니군지평조40례,운용약물경제학적성본-효과분석진행평개.결과 사조강압총유효솔비교,차이무통계학의의(균P>0.05);사조치료전후증상총 적분비교,차이균유통계학의의(균P<0.05);배타보리비용저우패나보리.결론 사충약물치료원발성고혈압료효상사,단배타보리비용저.
Objective To investigate the economic effects in patients with primary hypertension by four kinds of treatment.Methods 160 cases with primary hypertension were randomly divided into Benazepril group(n=40)、Perindopril group(n=40)、Amlodipine group(n=40) and Nitrendipine group(n=40),and data was evaluated with the pharmacoeconomic cost-effective analysis method.Results Hypertensive efficacy in 4 groups were not sig-nificantly different(x2=3.26,P>0.05);The symptom total score before treatment and after treatment was sisnifi-canfly different(a11 P<0.05);The SF-36 Scale after treatment in 4 groups were higher than before treatment(all P<0.05);The costs of pefindopril was lower than the benazepril.Conclusion Pharmacoeconomies played an important role in optimizing therapeutic scheme,guiding rational drug use and increasing economic effectiveness.