两种胆总管结石取石术的卫生经济学评估———ercp和传统开腹术比较-health economic evaluation of two kinds of choledocholithiasis extraction - comparison between ercp and traditional laparotomy.docxVIP

下载本文档

6
0
约5.86万字
约 62页
2018-05-28 发布于上海
举报
版权申诉

两种胆总管结石取石术的卫生经济学评估———ercp和传统开腹术比较-health economic evaluation of two kinds of choledocholithiasis extraction - comparison between ercp and traditional laparotomy.docx

1、原创力文档（book118）网站文档一经付费（服务费），不意味着购买了该文档的版权，仅供个人/单位学习、研究之用，不得用于商业用途，未经授权，严禁复制、发行、汇编、翻译或者网络传播等，侵权必究。。
2、本站所有内容均由合作方或网友上传，本站不对文档的完整性、权威性及其观点立场正确性做任何保证或承诺！文档内容仅供研究参考，付费前请自行鉴别。如您付费，意味着您自己接受本站规则且自行承担风险，本站不退款、不进行额外附加服务；查看《如何避免下载的几个坑》。如果您已付费下载过本站文档，您可以点击这里二次下载。
3、如文档侵犯商业秘密、侵犯著作权、侵犯人身权等，请点击“版权申诉”（推荐），也可以打举报电话：400-050-0827(电话支持时间：9:00-18:30)。
4、该文档为VIP文档，如果想要下载，成为VIP会员后，下载免费。
5、成为VIP后，下载本文档将扣除1次下载权益。下载后，不支持退款、换文档。如有疑问请联系我们。
6、成为VIP后，您将拥有八大权益，权益包括：VIP文档下载权益、阅读免打扰、文档格式转换、高级专利检索、专属身份标志、高级客服、多端互通、版权登记。
7、VIP文档为合作方或网友上传，每下载1次，网站将根据用户上传文档的质量评分、类型等，对文档贡献者给予高额补贴、流量扶持。如果你也想贡献VIP文档。上传文档

两种胆总管结石取石术的卫生经济学评估———ercp和传统开腹术比较-health economic evaluation of two kinds of choledocholithiasis extraction - comparison between ercp and traditional laparotomy

members of patients and their loved ones lost during the illness in its value of labor, with the present value method. Because the patient can not accurately calculate the indirect costs, the cost of hospitalization in patients taking only direct medical costs during the calculation.3 Cost - utility analysisUse of quantitative indicators of quality of life index GIQLI . Two groups of patients on quality of life assessment, and the results were compared; hospital stay and hospital costs can be compared. Using multiple stepwise regressions analyzes their influence factors. Last obtain cost-utility ratios in order to assess the economic assessment.Results：1 Compare the quality of life with the GIQLI indexEndoscopic group： The mean preoperative, and 2 and 6 weeks preoperative GIQLI indiceswere 103.0, 113.4 and 120.7；Open abdomen group： The mean preoperative, and 2 and 6 weeks preoperative GIQLI indices were 99.7, 107.2 and 116.9；The average length of stay comparedEndoscopic group： mean hospital stay (8.8 ± 6.5) days； Open abdomen group： mean hospital stay (13.9 ± 6.7) days；The average hospital cost comparisonEndoscopic group： the average hospital cost (22460.8 ± 13015.8) yuan； Open abdomen group： the average hospital cost (22915.9 ± 9469.2) yuan；Compare the cost - utility ratios(CUR) values and the incremental cost utility ratio，(ICUR)Endoscopic group： CUR1 =27,192.89，ICUR1 =203,008.28； Open abdomen group：CUR2 =28,250.09，ICUR2 =243,138.99 Conclusion：Compared with the traditional Open Abdomen Operation, common bile duct stones after routine ERCP are more conducive to improving quality of life of patients.Compared with the traditional Open Abdomen Operation, common bile duct stones routine ERCP is more low cost and the average length of stay is significantly shortened.The subject of the establishment of the cost-utility analysis, the program can easily calculate the cost utility of two surgical values. Compared with Open Abdomen Operation in patients, ERCP surgery in p