CAJ | 학술논문

目的：对头孢他啶2种给药方案治疗下呼吸道感染的效果进行经济学评价。方法：将86例下呼吸道细菌性感染患者随机分为A、B组，A组给予常规剂量静脉滴注治疗，B组给予头孢他啶持续性小剂量泵入治疗，观察疗效并进行经济学分析。结果：2组在临床疗效、不良反应发生率及细菌清除率方面无显著性差异（P＞0.05），但A组的治疗费用却明显高于B组（P＜0.05）。结论：头孢他啶持续性泵入治疗下呼吸道感染效果更佳且经济。
목적：대두포타정2충급약방안치료하호흡도감염적효과진행경제학평개。방법：장86례하호흡도세균성감염환자수궤분위A、B조，A조급여상규제량정맥적주치료，B조급여두포타정지속성소제량빙입치료，관찰료효병진행경제학분석。결과：2조재림상료효、불량반응발생솔급세균청제솔방면무현저성차이（P＞0.05），단A조적치료비용각명현고우B조（P＜0.05）。결론：두포타정지속성빙입치료하호흡도감염효과경가차경제。
To evaluate the pharmacoeconomic outcome of 2 therapeutic schemes of ceftazidime in treatment of lower respiratory tract infections. Methods: A total of 86 patients with lower respiratory tract infections were randomly divided into Group A and Group B. Ceftazidime was given by conventional dose in-travenous drip treatment in Group A, while it was given by continuous pumping intravenous infusion in Group B. The therapeutic effects were observed and the pharmacoeconomic analysis was conducted. Results: Between the 2 schemes, there were no significant differences (P>0.05) in the rates of effectiveness, ADR and bacteria clearance, but the treatment cost in Group A was higher than that in Group B (P<0.05). Conclusion: Continu-ous pumping intravenous infusion with ceftazidime for lower respiratory tract infections is cost-effective.