目的 建立替考拉寧的藥物利用評價（DUE）標準，采用屬性層次模型（AHM）綜合評價替考拉寧臨床應用的合理性。方法 以替考拉寧藥品說明書、相關臨床指南與專家共識為依據(jù)，制訂替考拉寧的DUE標準。采用AHM法對江蘇省蘇北人民醫(yī)院2022年10月—2023年12月183例應用替考拉寧患者的病歷進行分析。結果 替考拉寧不合理率居前3位的原因分別為給藥劑量155例（84.70%）、不良反應124例（67.76%）、聯(lián)合用藥110例（60.11%）。病例得分（MRS）＜60的43例（23.50%），60≤MRS＜80的99例（54.10%），80≤MRS＜90的27例（14.75%），MRS≥90的14例（7.65%），病例平均得分為69.19分。結論 江蘇省蘇北人民醫(yī)院替考拉寧臨床使用合理性欠佳。給藥劑量、不良反應及聯(lián)合用藥等方面有待完善，采取給藥劑量優(yōu)化、不良反應管理加強以及規(guī)范聯(lián)合用藥等措施進行針對性干預，進一步加強用藥合理性監(jiān)管，以提高替考拉寧的使用安全性和有效性。

Objective To establish the DUE criteria for teicoplanin in patients infected objectively, and evaluate the rationality of clinical practice of teicoplanin based on AHM comprehensively. Methods The DUE criteria of teicoplanin were established based on the drug instructions, related clinical guidelines and expert consensus. The archived cases of 183 patients treated with teicoplanin for injection in the hospital from October 2022 to December 2023 were analyzed and evaluated by AHM. Results The top 3 reasons for the irrationality rate of teicoplanin were 155 cases (84.70%) of administered dose, 124 cases (67.76%) of adverse reactions, and 110 cases (60.11%) of co-medication. Through scoring the cases, MRS < 60 was 43 cases (23.50%), 60 ≤ MRS < 80 was 99 cases (54.10%), 80 ≤ MRS < 90 was 27 cases (14.75%), and ≥ 90 was 14 cases (7.65%), respectively. The average score was 69.19. Conclusion The rational use of teicoplanin in Northern Jiangsu People’s Hospital was not up to the mark. The rational clinical application of teicoplanin, including administration dosage, drug adverse reaction, combination of medication, remains to be improved. Targeted intervention measures such as administration dose optimization, adverse reaction management strengthening and combined drug use standardization should be taken to further strengthen the rational supervision of drug use, and effective measures needs to be taken to target intervention, so as to improve the safety and effectiveness of the use of teicoplanin.

R978.1

江蘇省藥學會-恒瑞醫(yī)院藥學基金項目（H202009）