| 刘少华,赵蓉,匡良洪,等.呼吸与危重症医学科咳喘药学门诊的建设实践与效果评价[J].安徽医药,2024,28(2):418-424. |
| 呼吸与危重症医学科咳喘药学门诊的建设实践与效果评价 |
| Evaluation of the practice and effect of building a cough and asthma pharmacy clinic in the Department of PCCM |
| |
| DOI：10.3969/j.issn.1009-6469.2024.02.046 |
| 中文关键词: 哮喘 药学服务 呼吸与危重症医学科 药学门诊 效果评价 |
| 英文关键词: Asthma Pharmacy services PCCM Pharmacy clinic Effect evaluation |
| 基金项目:湖北省重点实验室开发基金项目( SB202110)；湖北省卫生健康委联合基金项目( WJ2019H181) |
|
| 摘要点击次数: 319 |
| 全文下载次数: 193 |
| 中文摘要: |
| 目的回顾性总结呼吸与危重症医学科( PCCM)咳喘药学门诊实践成果，与综合药学门诊进行成效对比，评估其药学服务价值，为其他医疗机构药学门诊的规划建设提供参考。方法选取黄石市中心医院药学综合门诊 2020年 11月至 2021年 5月及 PCCM咳喘药学门诊 2021年 11月至 2022年 5月就诊的哮喘病例，通过药学门诊病人用药评估指导单、病人吸入装置操作评定表，对比评价药学综合门诊和 PCCM药学门诊的药学服务效果。结果以药学综合门诊哮喘病人为对照组， PCCM咳喘药学门诊哮喘病人为干预组，病人自我用药情况评估，在知晓用药原因、用法用量、不良反应应对措施、药物相互作用方面，次就诊:对照组为 92例( 64.8%)、 109例( 76.8%)、 87例( 61.3%)、 85例( 59.9%)干预组为 90例( 65.2%)、 107例( 77.5%)、 83例首(60.1%)、 80例( 58.0%)两组差异无统计学意义( P>0.05)复诊或随诊时:对照，组为 118例( 83.1%)、 114例( 80.3%)、 98例(69.0%)、 94例( 66.2%)干，预组为 132例( 95.7%)、 128例( 92.8%，)、 123例( 89.1%)、 120例( 87.0%)干预组改善情况优于对照组(P<0.05)；哮喘控制测试(，ACT)评分，在良好控制、控制不佳方面，首次就诊:对照组为 21例( 14.8%)、1，21例( 85.2%)干预组为 19例( 13.8%)、 119例(86.2%)两组差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)复诊或随诊时:对照组为 88例(62.0%)、46例( 32.4%)，，干预组为 105例( 76.1%)、 8例( 5.8%)，干预组改善情况优于对照组( P<0.，05)；吸入制剂药师指导前后测评，在操作一般、操作不佳方面，药师指导前:对照组为 82例(，60.3%)、 32例( 23.5%)干预组为 81例( 62.3%)、 29例( 22.3%)，两组差异无统计学意义( P>0.05)药师指导后:对照组为 76例( 55.9%)、 18例(13.2%，干预组为 30例(23.1%)、2例(1.5%)，干预组改善情况优于对照组(P)， |
| 英文摘要: |
| Objective To retrospectively summarize the practice results of the Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine (PCCM) coughand asthma pharmacy clinic, compare the effectiveness with comprehensive pharmacy clinics, evaluate the value of its pharmacy servic.es, and provide a reference for the planning and construction of pharmacy clinics in other medical institutions.Methods Asthma pa.tients who visited the comprehensive pharmacy clinic of Huangshi Central Hospital from November 2020 to May 2021 and the PCCMcough and asthma pharmacy clinic from November 2021 to May 2022 were selected. The effectiveness of pharmacy services in the com.prehensive pharmacy clinic and PCCM pharmacy clinic was evaluated comparatively by using the patient medication assessment in.struction sheet and the patient inhalation device operation rating form in the pharmacy clinic.Results Asthma patients in the compre.hensive pharmacy clinic were used as the control group and the asthma patients in the PCCM cough and asthma pharmacy clinic wereused as the intervention group. Patients were assessed for self-medication in terms of knowing the cause of medication, usage, adversereaction response, and drug interaction at the first visit: 92 cases (64.8%), 109 cases (76.8%), 87 cases (61.3%), and 85 cases (59.9%)in the control group, and 90 cases (65.2%), 107 (77.5%), 83 cases (60.1%), and 80 cases (58.0%) in the intervention group, and the dif.ferences between the two groups were not statistically significant (P>0.05). At the time of return or follow-up, there were 118 cases(83.1%), 114 cases (80.3%), 98 cases (69.0%), and 94 cases (66.2%) in the control group, and 132 cases (95.7%), 128 cases (92.8%),123 cases (89.1%), and 120 cases (87.0%) in the intervention group, and the intervention group showed better improvement than thecontrol group (P<0.05). The Asthma Control Test (ACT) score, in terms of good control and poor control, at the first consultation was 21 cases (14.8%) and 121 cases (85.2%) in the control group and 19 cases (13.8%) and 119 cases (86.2%) in the intervention group, andthe difference between the two groups was not statistically significant (P>0.05). At the time of return or follow-up, there were 88 cases(62.0%) and 46 cases (32.4%) in the control group, and 105 cases (76.1%) and 8 cases (5.8%) in the intervention group, and the im.provement in the intervention group was better than that in the control group (P<0.05). In terms of general and poor operation, beforepharmacist guidance, there were 82 cases (60.3%) and 32 cases (23.5%) in the control group and 81 cases (62.3%) and 29 cases(22.3%) in the intervention group, and the difference between the two groups was not statistically significant (P>0.05). After pharmacistguidance, there were 76 cases (55.9%) and 18 cases (18 cases) in the control group, 18 cases (13.2%) in the control group and 30 cases(23.1%) and 2 cases (1.5%) in the intervention group, and the improvement in the intervention group was better than that in the controlgroup (P<0.05).Conclusion Compared with comprehensive pharmacy clinics, PCCM pharmacy clinics can play a better role in phar.macy services in terms of drug knowledge education, inhalation device operation, and cough control effect for asthma patients, which isa reference and significance for other medical institutions to plan and build pharmacy clinics. |
|
查看全文
查看/发表评论 下载PDF阅读器 |
| 关闭 |
|
|
|
