摘要 目的基于真实世界数据,探索中心静脉输注工具的管理和对应人群画像。方法基于某大型三甲医院的数据系统,回顾性收集2017年1月—2020年10月中心静脉输注工具使用情况及对应患者治疗信息(费用、住院日、是否感染),并按照工具使用情况分成4组:仅使用PICC、仅使用CVC、先使用PICC后使用CVC、先使用CVC后使用CPICC。应用R统计语言进行统计学分析。结果在控制混杂因素的情况下,组3、组4中途换管的病例与组1、组2只有一种输注工具的住院日、费用和院感发生率均有显著区别,组4的住院日中位数最高,组3的费用和院感发生率最高。PICC和CVC使用病例也可以通过人群特征(诊断个数、是否手术、护理级别等因素)的差异进行区分。结论真实世界中临床应用不同输注方式,其患者结局也存在一定的差异。PICC和CVC在非肿瘤治疗领域的使用需要进一步探索基于真实世界数据的耗材管理工具的应用价值。 Objective based on real-world data,the management of central intravenous infusion tools and corresponding population portraits were explored.Methods based on the data system of a large comprehensive hospital,the use of central intravenous infusion tools and related patient treatment information(cost,infection and hospitalization days)from January,2017 to October,2020 were collected retrospectively and divided into four groups according to the use of tools:PICC only,CVC only,PICC first and then CVC,CVC first and then PICC.R statistical language was used for statistical analysis.Results The results showed that,under the control of confounders,there were significant differences in hospitalization days,expenses and hospital-infection incidence between mixed infusion tool groups(group 3 and 4)and only one infusion tool groups(group 1 and 2),among which group 4 had the highest number of hospitalization days,while group 3 had the highest expenses and hospital-infection incidence.PICC and CVC use cases can also be distinguished by differences in population characteristics(number of diagnoses,surgery or not,nursing level,etc.).Conclusion In real world,patients with different infusion methods present different outcomes.The application value of consumables management tools based on real-world data needs to be further explored on PICC and CVC application in non-tumor treatment.
出处 《中国医院管理》 北大核心 2021年第4期60-64,共5页 Chinese Hospital Management
基金 北京市自然科学基金—海淀原始创新联合基金项目(L192047)。
关键词 中心静脉输注工具 经外周中心静脉置管 中心静脉置管 真实世界数据 人群画像 central intravenous infusion tool PICC CVC real word data population portrait
