請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件:
http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/44337
完整後設資料紀錄
DC 欄位 | 值 | 語言 |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.advisor | 賴美淑 | |
dc.contributor.author | Tzu-Chen Yeh | en |
dc.contributor.author | 葉姿辰 | zh_TW |
dc.date.accessioned | 2021-06-15T02:51:50Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2011-09-16 | |
dc.date.copyright | 2009-09-16 | |
dc.date.issued | 2009 | |
dc.date.submitted | 2009-08-05 | |
dc.identifier.citation | 1.World Health Organization. ( accessed at http://www.who.int/topics/diabetes_mellitus/en/ ). 2008.
2.行政院衛生署衛生統計資訊網. (accessed at http://www.doh.gov.tw/CHT2006/DM/DM2_2.aspx?now_fod_list_no=10238&class_no=440&level_no=1). 2008. 3.Chou P, Li CL, Tsai ST. Epidemiology of type 2 diabetes in Taiwan. Diabetes Res Clin Pract 2001;54:S29-35. 4.Canadian Diabetes Association Clinical Practice Guidelines Expert Committee. Canadian Diabetes Association 2008 clinical practice guidelines for the prevention and management of diabetes in Canada. Can J Diabetes 2008;32:S1-S201. 5.行政院衛生署國民健康局. 台灣地區高血壓、高血糖、高血脂盛行率調查期末報告. 2008. 6.Lin T, Chou P, Lai MS, et al. Direct costs-of-illness of patients with diabetes mellitus in Taiwan. Diabetes Res Clin Pract 2001;54:S43-6. 7.Rosenblum MS, Kane MP. Analysis of cost and utilization of health care services before and after initiation of insulin therapy in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Journal of Managed Care Pharmacy 2003;9:309-16. 8.Canadian Optimal Medication Prescribing and Utilization Service (COMPUS). Rapid-Acting Insulin Analogues for the Treatment of Diabetes Mellitus:Meta-analyses of Clinical Outcomes-Update of CADTH Technology Report No. 87. Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health 2008;2. 9.Canadian Optimal Medication Prescribing and Utilization Service (COMPUS). Long-Acting Insulin Analogues for the Treatment of Diabetes Mellitus:Meta-analyses of Clinical Outcomes–Update of CADTH Technology Report No. 92. Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health 2008;2. 10.Horvath K, Jeitler K, Berghold A, et al. Long-acting insulin analogues versus NPH insulin (human isophane insulin) for type 2 diabetes mellitus. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2007:CD005613. 11.Siebenhofer A, Plank J, Berghold A, et al. Short acting insulin analogues versus regular human insulin in patients with diabetes mellitus. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2006:CD003287. 12.Schneeweiss S. Developments in post-marketing comparative effectiveness research. Clin Pharmacol Ther 2007;82:143-56. Epub 2007 Jun 6. 13.Hauber A, Gale EAM. The market in diabetes. Diabetologia 2006;49:247-52. 14.Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health. Short-acting Insulin Analogues for Diabetes Mellitus: Meta-analysis of Clinical Outcomes and Assessment of Cost-effectiveness. 2007. 15.Craig ME, Hattersley A, Donaghue K. ISPAD Clinical Practice Consensus Guidelines 2006-2007. Definition, epidemiology and classification. Pediatr Diabetes 2006;7:343-51. 16.David K McCulloch, R Paul Robertson. Pathogenesis of type 2 diabetes mellitus. UptoDate 2008. 17.Nathan DM, Buse JB, Davidson MB. Medical Management of Hyperglycemia in Type 2 Diabetes: A Consensus Algorithm for the Initiation and Adjustment of Therapy: A consensus statement of the American Diabetes Association and the European Association for the Study of Diabetes. Diabetes Care 2009;32:193-203. Epub 2008 Oct 22. 18.UK Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS) Group. Intensive blood-glucose control with sulphonylureas or insulin compared with conventional treatment and risk of complications in patients with type 2 diabetes (UKPDS 33). Lancet 1998;352:837-53. 19.Nathan DM, Cleary PA, Backlund JY. Intensive diabetes treatment and cardiovascular disease in patients with type 1 diabetes. N Eng J Med 2005;353:2643-53. 20.International Diabetes Federation. Global Guideline for Type 2 Diabetes: recommendations for standard, comprehensive, and minimal care. Diabet Med 2006;23:579-93. 21.Rosenfeld L. Insulin: discovery and controversy. Clin Chem 2002;48:2270-88. 22.Hirsch IB. Insulin analogues. N Engl J Med 2005;352:174-83. 23.Holleman F, Gale EAM. Nice insulins, pity about the evidence.[see comment]. Diabetologia 2007;50:1783-90. 24.Diabetes Control and Complications Trial Research Group. The effect of intensive treatment of diabetes on the development and progression of long-term complications in insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus. The Diabetes Control and Complications Trial Research Group. N Engl J Med 1993;329:977-86. 25.The DCCT Research group. Epidemiology of severe hypoglycemia in the diabetes control and complications trial. The American Journal of Medicine 1991;90:450-9. 26.中央健康保險局. 健保用藥品項查詢. 27.Oiknine R, Bernbaum M, Mooradian AD. A critical appraisal of the role of insulin analogues in the management of diabetes mellitus. Drugs 2005;65:325-40. 28.Mooradian AD, Bernbaum M, Albert SG. Narrative review: a rational approach to starting insulin therapy. Ann Intern Med 2006;145:125-34. 29.Philip Levy. Insulin Analogs or Premixed Insulin Analogs in Combination With Oral Agents for Treatment of Type 2 Diabetes. Medscape general medicine 2007;9:12. 30.Marc Rendell. Diabetes: A primer on new drug options. Medical progress 2008;35:565-71. 31.Roach P, Bai S, Charbonnel B. Effects of multiple daily injection therapy with Humalog mixtures versus separately injected insulin lispro and NPH insulin in adults with type I diabetes mellitus. Clin Ther 2004; 26:502. 32.Canadian Optimal Medication Prescribing and Utilization Service (COMPUS). (Draft) Optimal Therapy Recommendations for the Prescribing and Use of Insulin Analogues. Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health 2008. 33.Leese GP, Wang J, Broomhall J, et al. Frequency of severe hypoglycemia requiring emergency treatment in type 1 and type 2 diabetes: a population-based study of health service resource use. Diabetes Care 2003;26:1176-80. 34.Holstein A, Plaschke A, Egberts EH. Incidence and costs of severe hypoglycemia. Diabetes Care 2002;25:2109-10. 35.Nordfeldt S, Jonsson D. Short-term effects of severe hypoglycaemia in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes. A cost-of-illness study. Acta Paediatr 2001;90:137-42. 36.中央銀行. 外幣結帳價格表. assessed at http://wwwcbcgovtw/public/Data/95271083471xls 2009. 37.Jonsson L, Bolinder B, Lundkvist J. Cost of hypoglycemia in patients with Type 2 diabetes in Sweden. Value Health 2006;9:193-8. 38.Rhoads GG, Orsini LS, Crown W, et al. Contribution of hypoglycemia to medical care expenditures and short-term disability in employees with diabetes. J Occup Environ Med 2005;47:447-52. 39.Institut für Qualität and Wirtschaftlichkeit im Gesundheitswesen. Rapid-acting insulin analogues for the treatment of diabetes mellitus type 2: final report. 40.Bullano MF, Al-Zakwani IS, Fisher MD, et al. Differences in hypoglycemia event rates and associated cost-consequence in patients initiated on long-acting and intermediate-acting insulin products. Curr Med Res Opin 2005;21:291-8. 41.Bullano MF, Fisher MD, Grochulski WD, et al. Hypoglycemic events and glycosylated hemoglobin values in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus newly initiated on insulin glargine or premixed insulin combination products. Am J Health Syst Pharm 2006;63:2473-82. 42.Warren E, Weatherley-Jones E, Chilcott J, et al. Systematic review and economic evaluation of a long-acting insulin analogue, insulin glargine. Health Technol Assess 2004;8:iii. 43.Vardi M, Jacobson E, Nini A, et al. Intermediate acting versus long acting insulin for type 1 diabetes mellitus. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2008:CD006297. 44.Smith SA, Murad MH. Review: long-acting insulin analogues do not improve glycaemic control but reduce nocturnal hypoglycaemia. Evid Based Med 2008;13:79-. 45.Alexander GC, Sehgal NL, Moloney RM, et al. National trends in treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus, 1994-2007. Arch Intern Med 2008;168:2088-94. 46.Patel H, Srishanmuganathan J, Car J, et al. Trends in the prescription and cost of diabetic medications and monitoring equipment in England 1991-2004. J Public Health (Oxf) 2007;29:48-52. Epub 2006 Nov 23. 47.Rathmann W, Haastert B, Icks A, et al. Trends in outpatient prescription drug costs in diabetic patients in Germany, 1994-2004. Diabetes Care 2007;30:848-53. 48.Hanko B, Tukarcs E, Kumli P, et al. Antidiabetic drug utilization in Hungary. Pharm World Sci 2005;27:263-5. 49.Chiang CW, Chiu HF, Chen CY, et al. Trends in the use of oral antidiabetic drugs by outpatients in Taiwan: 1997-2003. Journal of Clinical Pharmacy & Therapeutics 2006;31:73-82. 50.黃文鴻 Huang WF. 全民健康保險藥品費用支出變動因素之分析. 衛生署健保局 委託研究計畫 2008. 參考文獻 51.黃文鴻 Huang WF. 全民健康保險藥品申報趨勢及費用成長因素分析模式之建立. 衛生署健保局 委託研究計畫 2006. 52.Chen K, Chang EY, Summers KH, et al. Comparison of costs and utilization between users of insulin lispro versus users of regular insulin in a managed care setting. J Manag Care Pharm 2005;11:376-82. 53.Hall JA, Summers KH, Obenchain RL. Cost and utilization comparisons among propensity score-matched insulin lispro and regular insulin users. J Manag Care Pharm 2003;9:263-8. 54.Miller DR, Gardner JA, Hendricks AM, et al. Health care resource utilization and expenditures associated with the use of insulin glargine. Clin Ther 2007;29:478-87. 55.World Health Organization. ATC/DDD Index 2009. (accessed at http://wwwwhoccno/atcddd/indexdatabase/). 56.WHO. WHO Collaborating Centre for Drug Statistics Methodology. http://wwwwhoccno/atcddd/ 2009. 57.de Groot V, Beckerman H, Lankhorst GJ, et al. How to measure comorbidity. a critical review of available methods. J Clin Epidemiol 2003;56:221-9. 58.Charlson ME, Pompei P, Ales KL, et al. A new method of classifying prognostic comorbidity in longitudinal studies: development and validation. J Chronic Dis 1987;40:373-83. 59.Needham DM, Scales DC, Laupacis A, et al. A systematic review of the Charlson comorbidity index using Canadian administrative databases: a perspective on risk adjustment in critical care research. J Crit Care 2005;20:12-9. 60.Deyo RA, Cherkin DC, Ciol MA. Adapting a clinical comorbidity index for use with ICD-9-CM administrative databases. J Clin Epidemiol 1992;45:613-9. 61.Rosenbaum PR, Rubin DB. The Central Role of the Propensity Score in Observational Studies for Causal Effects. Biometrika 1983;70:41-55. 62.Ralph BDA, Jr. Propensity score methods for bias reduction in the comparison of a treatment to a non-randomized control group. Statistics in Medicine 1998;17:2265-81. 63.Mittleman MA, Maclure M, Tofler GH, et al. Triggering of acute myocardial infarction by heavy physical exertion. Protection against triggering by regular exertion.Determinants of Myocardial Infarction Onset Study Investigators. N Engl J Med 1993;329:1677-83. 64.Chris' Delaney JA, Suissa S. The case-crossover study design in pharmacoepidemiology. Statistical Methods in Medical Research 2009;18:53-65. 65.Hugonnet S, Villaveces A, Pittet D. Nurse staffing level and nosocomial infections: empirical evaluation of the case-crossover and case-time-control designs. Am J Epidemiol 2007;165:1321-7. Epub 2007 Mar 30. 66.Sebastian Schneeweiss, Til Sturmer, Malcolm Maclure. Case-crossover and case-time-control designs as alternatives in pharmacoepidemiologic research. Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety 1997;6:S51-S9. 67.Lumley T, Levy D. Bias in the case–crossover design: implications for studies of air pollution. Environmetrics 2000;11:689-704. 68.Canadian Optimal Medication Prescribing and Utilization Service (COMPUS). An Economic Evaluation of Insulin Analogues for the Treatment of Patients with Type 1 and Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus in Canada. Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health 2008. 69.Karve S, Cleves MA, Helm M, et al. An empirical basis for standardizing adherence measures derived from administrative claims data among diabetic patients. Med Care 2008;46:1125-33. 70.Hertz RP, Unger AN, Lustik MB. Adherence with pharmacotherapy for type 2 diabetes: a retrospective cohort study of adults with employer-sponsored health insurance. Clinical Therapeutics 2005;27:1064-73. 71.Wang F, Carabino JM, Vergara CM. Insulin glargine: a systematic review of a long-acting insulin analogue. Clin Ther 2003;2003 Jun;25:1541-77. 72.Weitzen S, Lapane KL, Toledano AY, et al. Principles for modeling propensity scores in medical research: a systematic literature review. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf 2004;13:841-53. 73.中央健保局. 最新健保數據--全民健保統計年報. 2009. 74.Tseng FY, MS L. Effects of physician specialty on use of antidiabetes drugs, process and outcomes of diabetes care in a medical center. J Formos Med Assoc 2006;105:821-31. 75.國民健康局. 台灣地區高血壓、高血糖、高血脂盛行率調查期末報告. assessed at http://wwwbhpdohgovtw/health91/pdf/3H/07pdf 2009. 76.中央健保局. 糖尿病專業醫療服務品質報告(97.02.14更新). assessed at http://wwwnhigovtw/webdata/webdataasp?menu=1&menu_id=7&webdata_id=848&WD_ID= 2009. 77.行政院衛生署. 96年度全民健康保險醫療統計年報 assessed at http://wwwdohgovtw/CHT2006/DM/DM2_2aspx?now_fod_list_no=10351&class_no=440&level_no=3 2009. 78.林正清Lin C-c. 台灣全民健康保險糖尿病資料庫有關之研究DIABETES RESEARCH OF INSURANCE CLAIMS DATA IN TAIWAN. 2003. 79.Canadian Optimal Medication Prescribing and Utilization Service (COMPUS). Current utilization of insulin products in Canada. Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health 2008. 80.Lechleitner M, Roden M, Haehling E, et al. Insulin glargine in combination with oral antidiabetic drugs as a cost-equivalent alternative to conventional insulin therapy in type 2 diabetes mellitus. Wiener klinische Wochenschrift 2005;117:593-8. 81.Fabunmi R, Nielsen LL, Quimbo R, et al. Patient characteristics, drug adherence patterns, and hypoglycemia costs for patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus newly initiated on exenatide or insulin glargine *. Curr Med Res Opin 2009. 82.Heaton A, Martin S, Brelje T. The economic effect of hypoglycemia in a health plan. Manag Care Interface 2003;16:23-7. 83.Stephens JM, Botteman MF, Hay JW. Economic impact of antidiabetic medications and glycemic control on managed care organizations: a review of the literature.[see comment]. Journal of Managed Care Pharmacy 2006;12:130-42. 84.Maclure M, Mittleman, M A. Should We Use a Case-Crossover Design? Annual Review of Public Health 2000;21:193-221. 85.Holly Janes, Lianne Sheppard, Thomas Lumley. Overlap bias in the case-crossover design, with application to air pollution exposures. . Stat Med 2005;24:285-300. 86.Suissa S. The case-time-control design. Epidemiology 1995;6:248-53. 87.American Diabetes Association. Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes--2009. Diabetes Care 2009;32:S13-61. | |
dc.identifier.uri | http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/44337 | - |
dc.description.abstract | 背景:國外研究顯示長效胰島素類似物(long-acting insulin analogue)因為濃度變化穩定,較無傳統中長效胰島素(intermediate-long acting insulin, ILI)易發生低血糖副作用,病患的醫療費用也並不會較高。台灣近年上市新型胰島素類似物使用率增加,然而台灣上市後藥品效性比較之研究缺乏胰島素主題,也無研究探討使用不同基礎型胰島素的糖尿病患其醫療利用與費用。本研究利用健保資料庫以傾向性評分方法(propensity score method)探討影響選擇長效胰島素類似物處方之因素,分析使用不同基礎型胰島素病患之醫療利用與費用,並設計一病例交叉研究(case-crossover study),評估不同基礎型胰島素之低血糖風險。
研究方法: 本研究以93年1月1日至95年12月31日之全民健保資料庫做回溯性,觀察性研究,取93年7月1日至95年12月31日新使用長效胰島素類似物或傳統中長效胰島素之糖尿病患(19075人),先以過去背景資料(開第一張處方前六個月)做為傾向性評分模型之變項,計算病患接受長效胰島素類似物的機率。另取發生過低血糖病患做病例交叉設計之研究對象(930人),第一次發生低血糖為事件日,取事件日前一病例期與三組對照期(1:3 配對比例),在條件式邏輯斯迴歸(conditional logistic regression)模型放入與時間相關之變項,得到降血糖藥物之暴露勝算比。再者將族群挑選追蹤期間單一使用研究藥品病患(17000人),類似物分為insulin glargine(IGlar)組2961人及insulin detemir(IDet)組683人,及傳統中長效胰島素ILI組13356人,以描述性分析與事後檢定三組醫療利用與費用之差異。 結果: 第一部分:傾向性評分結果,醫學中心、診所、內分泌科、家醫科及女醫師較易傾向開立長效胰島素類似物,病人罹患代謝疾病、接受較多次糖化血色素檢驗、曾接受預混型胰島素藥物、接受口服降血糖藥物種類越多、或糖尿病門診費用越高者,都有較高機會接受長效胰島素類似物。第二部分: 使用傳統中長效胰島素比未使用該藥者增加低血糖風險[Odds ratio (OR) = 1.45, p<0.01],使用長效胰島素類似物比未使用該藥者低血糖風險雖增加但不顯著[OR=1.57, p=0.08],長效胰島素類似物與傳統中長效胰島素相較之低血糖風險無差異[OR=1.05, p=0.85]。第三部分: 醫療利用分析,長效胰島素類似物組(insulin glargine及insulin detemir組)之門診降血糖藥費及門診醫療費用高、門診次數高、門診研究藥品使用量多、及檢驗糖化血色素次數較多(p<0.001),然而住院次數及住院費用較低(p<0.001),使得整體醫療費用較少(IDet台幣104,769元,IGlar 台幣103,111元,ILI 台幣140,413元, p<0.001)。 結論: 使用傳統中長效胰島素的確比未使用該藥會增加低血糖風險;由於使用長效胰島素類似物樣本數少,傳統中長效胰島素與長效胰島素類似物之低血糖風險無差異的結果須保守看待,需要將來收集更多樣本作驗證。傳統中長效胰島素使用者之整體醫療費用較長效胰島素類似物使用者高,主要是高額的住院費用所貢獻。就目前研究結果,使用傳統中長效胰島素要注意低血糖副作用,同時注意病患是否因共病程度多,以至於住院情況較嚴重影響醫療利用大幅上升,若能改善醫療照顧品質(例如增加檢測糖化血色素次數,積極控制糖尿病)進而減少併發症發生,以致住院率與住院費用下降,或許能降低整體醫療費用。 | zh_TW |
dc.description.abstract | Background: The usage of insulin analogue in Taiwan increase in latest years. Recent studies stated that long-acting insulin analogues (LAIA) provide a delayed onset of action and a peakless effect that may be associated with fewer episodes of hypoglycemia than conventional insulin. It might also provide moderation of health utilization and medical cost. However, there is lack of studies in postmarketing comparative effectiveness or health utilization of basal insulins in Taiwan. The aims of this study were to evaluate hypoglycemic risk of different basal insulin and to analyze the utilization from patients newly initiated these agents Besides, we evaluated which factors would influence prescriptions of insulin analogue with propensity score (PS) method.
Methods: We conducted a retrospective analysis using National Health Insurance claims data for diabetes newly treated with LAIA or conventional intermediate-long acting insulin (ILI) between July 1, 2004 and December 31, 2006 (n=19075). Eligibility required at least 6 months of insurance before the index prescription date. The PS for receiving LAIA was estimated using logistic regression based on observed characteristics such as patient levels, hospital levels, and diabetes-related costs and utilization. Patients who had at least one hypoglycemic event during this period were extracted (n=930). The first hypoglycemic event was defined as index event. We defined case period as 1-14 days immediately before the event and 3 matched control periods 29-42, 43-56, 57-70 days prior to the index event of the same patient. Exposure to LAIA or ILI during different periods was compared using conditional logistic regression adjusting with time-dependent covariates. n the cohort study, individuals with prescriptions for only insulin detemir (IDet, n=683), insulin glargine (IGlar, n=2961) or ILI(n=13356) were followed until death or the end of study. Utilization of these groups was analyzed with general linear model and post hoc analyses. Results: Part I. The associated factors related to prescribing LAIA were medical centers, clinics, endocrinologists, family physicians, female doctors, metabolic disease, A1c tests, premixed insulin, or diabetes-related outpatient costs. Part II. By using case-crossover approach, recent use of ILI was associated with hypoclycemia. [Odds ratio (OR) = 1.45, p<0.01]. There was no significantlly increasing hypoglycemic risk of LAIA [OR=1.57, p=0.08]. The OR of LAIA over ILI was 1.05 and non-significant (p=0.85). Part III. On average, IDet and IGlar subjects had obviously more outpatient visits and costs, analogues usage, diabetes-related pharmacy costs and A1c tests (p<0.001) but fewer inpatient visits and costs (p<0.001) compared to ILI users. Total medical costs were reduced in analogues users (IDet NT$104769, IGlar NT$103111 vs ILI NT$140413, p<0.001). Conclusion: Subjects newly treated with intermediate-long acting insulin have indeed higher hypoglycemic risk than nonusers of this drug. Owing to fewer subjects of long-acting insulin analogues, we couldn’t confirm that there was no statistical difference of hypoglycemic risk between long-acting insulin analogues and intermediate-long acting insulin. We need to collect more information to prove it in future study. Compared to intermediate-long acting insulin users, long-acting insulin analogues users incurred higher outpatient utilization and diabetes-related pharmacy costs but fewer hospitalizations which led lower total costs. Finally, we should improve quality of care, such as increasing A1c tests, in those patients using intermediate-long acting insulin who have more comorbidities and higher hospitalization rates, thus diabetic complications would be decreased and total medical cost would be reduced thereafter. | en |
dc.description.provenance | Made available in DSpace on 2021-06-15T02:51:50Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 ntu-98-P96846002-1.pdf: 632187 bytes, checksum: ee36a48dbaed5706380819167d229b74 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2009 | en |
dc.description.tableofcontents | 誌謝………………………………………………………………… i
中文摘要……………………………………………………………..p.1 英文摘要……………………………………………………………..p.3 第一章 緒論………………………………………………………..p.5 第一節 研究背景………………………………………. ……..p.5 第二節 研究重要性…………………………………………. ..p.6 第二章 文獻探討…………………………………………………..p.7 第一節 糖尿病的治療…………………………………………p.7 第二節 胰島素類型之發展與使用……………………………p.8 第三節 胰島素副作用「低血糖」之影響……………………p.14 第四節 胰島素效性(effectiveness)研究之文獻回顧…………p.16 第五節 胰島素利用率之文獻回顧………………………........p.24 第六節 ATC/DDD 系統………………………………………p.28 第七節 Charlson index…………………………………………p.29 第八節 傾向性評分Propensity score………………………….p.31 第九節 病例交叉設計(case crossover design) .………………p.33 第三章 研究材料與方法…………………………………………p.35 第一節 研究架構………………………………………………p.35 第二節 研究設計………………………………………………p.36 第三節 資料來源………………………………………………..p.37 第四節 研究對象………………………………………………..p.40 第五節 資料處理流程…………………………………………..p.42 第六節 病例交叉設計…………………………………………..p.43 第七節 藥物時序資料…………………………………………..p.44 第八節 變項定義………………………………………………..p.46 第九節 統計方法………………………………………………..p.53 第四章 研究結果…………………………………………………..p.58 第一節 篩選研究對象………………..…………………………p.58 第二節 研究樣本背景資料分析結果…………………………..p.59 第三節 族群有無醫囑性之描述性分析結果………………..…p.63 第四節 以傾向性評分預測接受長效胰島素類似物影響因素...p66 第五節 基礎型胰島素與低血糖風險分析結果………………p.68 第六節 醫療利用分析結果……………………………………p.73 第五章 討論………………………………………………………p.81 第一節 新使用基礎型胰島素糖尿病患背景資料分析與propensity score預測用藥傾向……………………………………p.80 第二節 基礎型胰島素與低血糖發生率………………………..p.85 第三節 新使用基礎型胰島素糖尿病患醫療利用分析………..p.87 第四節 優勢……………………………………………………..p.90 第五節 研究限制………………………………………………..p.90 第六章 結論與建議………………………………………………..p.92 第一節 結論……………………………………………………..p.92 第二節 建議……………………………………………………..p.92 參考文獻……………………………………………………………..p.93 | |
dc.language.iso | zh-TW | |
dc.title | 糖尿病族群新使用基礎型胰島素之低血糖風險與利用研究 | zh_TW |
dc.title | Hypoglycemic risk and utilization in diabetic population initiating basal insulin treatment | en |
dc.type | Thesis | |
dc.date.schoolyear | 97-2 | |
dc.description.degree | 碩士 | |
dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | 蕭朱杏,莊立民,季瑋珠,邵文逸 | |
dc.subject.keyword | 胰島素,低血糖,醫療利用,病例交叉設計,傾向性評分, | zh_TW |
dc.subject.keyword | insulin,hypoglycemia,health care utilization,case-crossover design,propensity score, | en |
dc.relation.page | 98 | |
dc.rights.note | 有償授權 | |
dc.date.accepted | 2009-08-05 | |
dc.contributor.author-college | 公共衛生學院 | zh_TW |
dc.contributor.author-dept | 預防醫學研究所 | zh_TW |
顯示於系所單位: | 流行病學與預防醫學研究所 |
文件中的檔案:
檔案 | 大小 | 格式 | |
---|---|---|---|
ntu-98-1.pdf 目前未授權公開取用 | 617.37 kB | Adobe PDF |
系統中的文件,除了特別指名其著作權條款之外,均受到著作權保護,並且保留所有的權利。