http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.
변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.
이비인후과 영역에서 일반의와 전문의에 의한 외래처방전의 비교 평가
민현성(Hyun Seong Min),송태범(Tae Beom Song,)이명구(Myung Koo Lee),장제관(Je Kwan Jang),이종길(Chong Kil Lee),임성실(Sung Cil Lim) 대한약학회 2010 약학회지 Vol.54 No.4
As people are easy to access the National Health Insurance, medical health service has been increased. It contributed to extend human’s average life expectancy and to get better health care. But also increased unnecessary health service or inappropriate drug use. Therefore, DUR (Drug Use Review) is needed to induce appropriate drug use. The purpose of this study is to evaluate outpatient prescriptions by General Practitioner (GP) and Specialized Practitioner, especially indication for ENT referral including common cold which is the frequent indications that have patient see doctor. This study was reviewed retrospectively prescriptions for ENT referral collected at the A pharmacy for ENT Clinic in Cheong-Ju, B pharmacy for GP Clinic in BoEun from Feb 2nd, 2009 to Feb 28th, 2009. Each pharmacy located closed to the each enrolled clinic. The numbers of collected prescriptions were each A pharmacy (n=2501), B pharmacy (n=1343). This study was classified Drug Related Problems (DRPs) those prescriptions had as total 6 groups according to following 6 categories; 1) Unnecessary Drug, 2) Wrong Drug, 3) Low Dose, 4) Overdose, 5) Wrong Instruction, 6) Wrong Combination. In results, Specialized Practitioner’s prescriptions had more DRPs than General Practitioner’s prescriptions (ENT 155.34% vs GP 130.01%). In detail, Specialized Practitioner’s prescriptions had more DRPs in Low Dose (ENT 16.95% vs GP 4.77%), Overdose (ENT 6.72% vs G.P 5.51%), Wrong Instruction (ENT 7.91% vs GP 5.81%), Wrong Combination (ENT 29.31% vs GP 25.09%). These DRPs would be caused from lack of consideration for dosage and drug interaction. General Practitioner’s prescriptions had more DRPs in Unnecessary Drug (ENT 70.37% vs GP 78.85%), Wrong drug (ENT 4.12% vs GP 9.98%). These DRPs would be associated with drug selection. This study was assumed that Specialized Practitioner is better prescriber than General Practitioner because Specialized Practitioner complete additional intern and residency training. But, Specialized Practitioner is not always better prescriber than General Practitioner. Furthermore, prescriptions of both Specialized Practitioner and General Practitioner had many problems. In conclusion, It could be cut down the excessive medical expense and expected more efficient medical care by reducing DRPs, thus contributing to the improvement of national health. In order to pharmacist must have good professional ability of pharmacotherapy to help the physician for the drug selection.
신생아의 TPN 요법 시 발생되는 Cholestasis 치료를 위한 Ursodeoxycholic Acid의 약물사용 평가
이정옥(Jung Ok Lee),송태범(Tae Beom Song),이명구(Myung Koo Lee),임성실(Sung Cil Lim) 대한약학회 2010 약학회지 Vol.54 No.4
Total parenteral nutrition (TPN) is necessary to neonates in neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) for survival and growth because of impossible of enteral feeding. Long-term TPN can be associated with a broad spectrum of hepatobiliary disorder, ranging from mild hepatic dysfunction to severe end-stage liver disease. Cholestasis developed most commonly in neonate, ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA) is widely used in adult with cholestatic and non-cholestatic liver diseases but there have been limited data on the effects in neonate with PNAC. This study was performed retrospectively to review all medical histories of the total 30 neonates with was administrated UDCA for treatment to parenteral nutrition associated cholestasis (PNAC) at Chungbuk National University Hospital NICU from April 2002 to December 2008. UDCA was administrated at bilirubin is over 2 mg/dl. The criterias for drug evaluation were included hepatic biochemical marker such as direct bilirubin, total bilirubin, AST, ALT, ALP and GGT, TPN therapy period, cholestasis development period, UDCA treatment period, UDCA dosage and adverse effect. In the results, Post-UDCA treatment significant was decreased direct bilirubin, total bilirubin, AST and ALP (p<0.05), and was decreased GGT (p>0.05) and slightly was increased ALT (p>0.05). Reffective timect biDCA was appear at mean 10.5±1.3 days, iDCA administration period was mean 64.4±5.9 days, cholestasis period was mean 71.9±6.4 days and UDCA dosage was mean 22.9±0.9 mg/kg/day. Common adverse effects is diarrhea, 5 patients arised mild diarrhea but it possible also related with increased enteral feeding. In conclusion, iDCA can decrease direct bilirubin that major parameter t bcholestasis and oher hepatic biochemical makers. UDCA is effective on PNAC without any serious side effect and cost-effective. Although no greatly shortening cholestasis period, but can protect to develop into severe liver disease and other complication or death. Based on these result, UDCA is recommended for treatment of cholestasis at direct bilirubin is over 2 mg/dl.