司帕沙星与洛美沙星片剂临床疗效及安全性的比较

殷凯生, 李梅梅, 许志超, 蔡健康

殷凯生, 李梅梅, 许志超, 蔡健康. 司帕沙星与洛美沙星片剂临床疗效及安全性的比较[J]. 实用临床医药杂志, 1999, (1): 1-3.
引用本文: 殷凯生, 李梅梅, 许志超, 蔡健康. 司帕沙星与洛美沙星片剂临床疗效及安全性的比较[J]. 实用临床医药杂志, 1999, (1): 1-3.
A COMPARISON ON CLINICAL EFFICACY AND SAFETY OF SPARFLOXACIN AND LOMEFLOXACIN[J]. Journal of Clinical Medicine in Practice, 1999, (1): 1-3.
Citation: A COMPARISON ON CLINICAL EFFICACY AND SAFETY OF SPARFLOXACIN AND LOMEFLOXACIN[J]. Journal of Clinical Medicine in Practice, 1999, (1): 1-3.

司帕沙星与洛美沙星片剂临床疗效及安全性的比较

A COMPARISON ON CLINICAL EFFICACY AND SAFETY OF SPARFLOXACIN AND LOMEFLOXACIN

  • 摘要: 目的:评价抗菌新药司帕沙星片剂的临床疗效及安全性。方法:以洛美沙星片剂为对照,在73例急性细菌性感染患者中进行随机对照性研究。结果:试验组的痊愈率(84.21%)、有效率(92.11%)均高于对照组的痊愈率(65.71%)和有效率(82.86%),但统计学差异无显著性(P>0.05)。试验组患者不良反应发生率(5.3%)显著低于对照组(14.3%),P<0.05。结论:在细菌感染性疾病的治疗中,司帕沙星片剂优于洛美沙星片剂。
    Abstract: Aim: to evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety of Sparfloxacin tablets, a random con-trast study compared with Lomefloxacin tablts in 73 patients with acute infections caused by bacteria wasperformed. Result: the recovered rate (84. 21 % ) and effective rate (92. 11 % ) in the test group werehigher than the recovered rate (65. 71 % ) and effective rate (82. 86% ) in the contrast group, thoughthere were no significant differance statistically (P O. O5). The side - effetive rate was 5. 3% in thetest group, which was lower than that (14. 3% ) in control group (P 0. 05 ). Conclusion:Sparfloxacin tablets are better than Lomefloxacin tablets in treating acute infectious-diseases caused by bac-teria.
计量
  • 文章访问数:  149
  • HTML全文浏览量:  25
  • PDF下载量:  18
  • 被引次数: 0
出版历程

目录

    /

    返回文章
    返回
    x 关闭 永久关闭