Misan G M, Martin E D, Smith E R, Somogyi A A, Bartholomeusz R C, Bochner F
Pharmacy Department, Royal Adelaide Hospital, S.A., Australia.
Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 1990;39(5):457-61. doi: 10.1007/BF00280936.
A prospective, two-phase, drug utilization review (DUR) was performed at the Royal Adelaide Hospital (RAH) to determine the extent and pattern of vancomycin use. For all patients commencing oral or parenteral vancomycin, treatment indication, route of administration, duration of therapy, results of culture and sensitivity tests, adverse drug reactions and results of therapeutic drug level monitoring were recorded. Vancomycin courses were classified as being for therapy or prophylaxis and compared with predetermined audit criteria to assess appropriateness of use. During the 8 week initial phase, data on 62 treatment courses in 59 patients were recorded, 50% for therapy and 50% for prophylaxis. Sixty four percent were classified as inappropriate, occurring in 32% of therapeutic courses and 97% of those for prophylaxis. During the 10 week re-evaluation, conducted 10 months later, data for 43 treatment courses in 43 patients were reviewed, 42% for therapy and 58% for prophylaxis. Sixty five percent were inappropriate occurring in 17% of therapeutic courses and 100% of the prophylactic courses. When compared with the initial phase, the re-evaluation demonstrated a decrease in the empirical use of vancomycin in the combination treatment of neutropaenic fever and also in the duration of vancomycin use for surgical prophylaxis. During both study phases, criteria contraventions were mostly due to inappropriate indication or duration of therapy. The cost of inappropriate vancomycin use was reduced by over 50% between survey phases, from $Aus11,500 or 55% of total vancomycin cost during the initial phase to $Aus3,600 or 25.7% during the re-evaluation. The most effective of the remedial strategies implemented after the initial phase was direct consultation with prescriber groups.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)
在阿德莱德皇家医院(RAH)进行了一项前瞻性、两阶段的药物利用评估(DUR),以确定万古霉素的使用范围和模式。对于所有开始口服或静脉注射万古霉素的患者,记录治疗指征、给药途径、治疗持续时间、培养和药敏试验结果、药物不良反应以及治疗药物浓度监测结果。万古霉素疗程分为治疗或预防用药,并与预先确定的审核标准进行比较,以评估使用的合理性。在为期8周的初始阶段,记录了59例患者62个治疗疗程的数据,其中50%用于治疗,50%用于预防。64%被归类为不适当,出现在32%的治疗疗程和97%的预防疗程中。在10个月后进行的为期10周的重新评估中,审查了43例患者43个治疗疗程的数据,其中42%用于治疗,58%用于预防。65%不适当,出现在17%的治疗疗程和100%的预防疗程中。与初始阶段相比,重新评估显示在中性粒细胞减少性发热的联合治疗中万古霉素的经验性使用以及手术预防中万古霉素的使用持续时间有所减少。在两个研究阶段,标准违规主要是由于治疗指征不适当或治疗持续时间不当。在两个调查阶段之间,不适当使用万古霉素的成本降低了50%以上,从初始阶段的11,500澳元或占万古霉素总成本的55%降至重新评估期间的3,600澳元或25.7%。初始阶段后实施的补救策略中最有效的是与处方医生团体直接协商。(摘要截选至250字)