中国药物警戒 ›› 2023, Vol. 20 ›› Issue (7): 812-816.
DOI: 10.19803/j.1672-8629.20230036

• 安全与合理用药 • 上一篇    下一篇

肠外营养个体化给药实践评价

陈婕1,2, 秦侃1,2,*   

  1. 1安徽医科大学药学院,安徽 合肥 230061;
    2安徽医科大学第三附属医院药学部,安徽 合肥 230061
  • 收稿日期:2023-01-29 出版日期:2023-07-15 发布日期:2023-07-14
  • 通讯作者: *秦侃,男,硕导,主任药师,临床药学。E-mail:Qinkan99@163.com
  • 作者简介:陈婕,女,硕士,临床药学。
  • 基金资助:
    安徽省医疗卫生重点专科建设项目(皖卫函[2021]273号)

Evaluation of individualized parenteral nutrition delivery

CHEN Jie1,2, QIN Kan1,2,*   

  1. 1Anhui Medical University, Hefei Anhui 230061, China;
    2Department of Pharmacy, the Third Affiliated Hospital of Anhui Medical University, Hefei Anhui 230061, China
  • Received:2023-01-29 Online:2023-07-15 Published:2023-07-14

摘要: 目的 评价临床药师参与全营养混合液(TNA)组方设计,为患者提供个体化给药方案的临床疗效。方法 研究2020年1月1日至2021年12月15日在某院进行肠外营养支持治疗的消化类疾病患者,分成临床药师参与设计的个体化全营养混合液输注组49例(个体化组)和营养药剂单瓶输注组56例(单瓶组)。记录2组患者治疗前后营养、肝肾功能等生化指标以及并发症、不良反应、住院天数等。结果 个体化组治疗前后前白蛋白、肌酐、视黄醇结合蛋白和C反应蛋白组内比较有差异,单瓶组前白蛋白和肌酐组内比较有差异(P<0.05)。2组治疗后尿素和前白蛋白有显著差异;单瓶组的前白蛋白和视黄醇结合蛋白相较治疗前下降,个体化组出现上升趋势,2组C反应蛋白均较治疗前下降,但是个体化组下降幅度显著大于单瓶组(P<0.05),其他指标无统计学差异;并发症发生率个体化组19.6%显著低于单瓶组6.12%(P<0.05);2组在营养支持天数[(14.66±7.15)d vs(10.41±8.22)d]差异有统计学意义(P<0.05),2组均无相关的不良反应报告。结论 个体化组相较于单瓶组具有良好的疗效,帮助临床了解药师参与肠外营养治疗给药方案给患者带来的获益,个体化肠外营养支持治疗有助于提高临床疗效。

关键词: 临床药师, 肠外营养, 个体化组方, 疗效评价

Abstract: Objective To evaluate the clinical efficacy of clinical pharmacists’ involvement in the design of a total nutrition admixture (TNA) formulary to provide individualized dosing regimens for patients. Methods The clinical data of patients with digestive disorders treated with parenteral nutrition support between January 1, 2020 and December 15, 2021 was retrospectively studied. There were 49 cases in the individualized total nutrition admixture infusion group (individualized group) in which clinical pharmacists participated and another 56 cases in the single bottle infusion of nutritional drugs group (single bottle group). Such data as the nutritional indexes, liver and kidney function indicators, complications, adverse reactions, and hospital stay were collected. Results The levels of prealbumin, retinol-binding protein. C-reactive protein and creatinine in the individualized group changed significantly after treatment, so were the levels of prealbumin and creatinine in the single bottle group (P<0.05). Levels of urea and pre-albumin were significantly different in the two groups after treatment. Prealbumin and retinol binding protein decreased in the single bottle group after treatment, but increased in the individualized group. C-reactive protein decreased in both groups after treatment, especially in the individualized group (P<0.05), but there was no statistically significant difference in other indexes. The rate of complications was 6.12% in the individualized group, significantly lower than 19.6% in the single bottle group (P<0.05). There was significant difference between the two groups in the duration of parenteral nutrition support [(14.66±7.15) d vs (10.41±8.22)d] (P<0.05), but not in the length of hospital stay. No related adverse reactions were reported in either group. Conclusion The individualized group has better efficacy than in the single bottle group, which can help clinicians better understand the benefits pharmacists’ involvement in parenteral nutrition therapy. The individualized parenteral nutrition support therapy helps improve clinical outcomes.

Key words: clinical pharmacist, parenteral nutrition, individualized formulary, efficacy evaluation

中图分类号: