Objective To analyze the rationality of emergency medication in the West China Hospital after Lushan earthquake based on the actual drug use of earthquake victims. Methods We applied DDDs and DUI as evaluation index, input data using Excel software, and analyzed if the emergency medication was required for the injury/illness and the rationality of emergency medication. Results Earthquake victims mainly had trauma and wound infection and they were given antibiotics as main treatment one week after the earthquake. Drugs for the respiratory system and digestive system were mainly used in patients who mainly manifested as non-traumatic diseases and internal diseases four weeks after the earthquake. Among 49 kinds of drugs which could be calculated for the value of DUI, injection accounted for a larger proportion than non-injection (59.18% vs. 40.82%). The results showed that, the medication (DUI=1) only accounted for 12.24%; the medication (DUIlt;1, Mean=0.65) accounted for 38.78%, which implied insufficient drug use; the medication (DUIgt;1, Mean=1.77) accounted for 46.94%, which implied drug overuse. Conclusion Medication for every system is basically timely and rational when treating symptoms and causes in the West China Hospital within one month after Lushan earthquake. However, the rationality of emergency medications using DUI=1 under normal conditions still needs to be further verified.
Objective To comparatively analyze the rationality of emergency medication after Wenchuan earthquake with that after Lushan earthquake in West China Hospital of Sichuan University, based on the use of medicine of the victim’s disease spectrum. Method By using Excel, defined daily dose system (DDDs) and drug utilization index (DUI) were used as the evaluation indexes to analyze the rationality of emergency medication in West China Hospital of Sichuan University within one month after Wenchuan earthquake and Lushan earthquake. Results Within one month after Wenchuan and Lushan earthquake, there were 1 839 and 488 victims treated in the hospital, respectively. Within one month after the two earthquakes, the variation tendency of DDDs of drugs and number of victims was consistent, and the consistency was better in Lushan earthquake than that in Wenchuan earthquake. Among the 60 drugs which DDDs were ranked top five in their pharmacological class (top ten for antimicrobials) in Wenchuan earthquake, the majority of them were injections (injections vs. non-injections: 70.0% vs. 30.0%); the results showed that the medication (DUI=1) only accounted for 10.0%, the medication (DUI<1) accounted for 28.3%, which implied that the use of drugs was insufficient, the medication (DUI>1) accounted for 61.7%, which implied that drugs were overused; the average of DUI was 1.61. And in Lushan earthquake, injections also accounted for a larger proportion than non-injections (63.3%vs. 36.7%); the results showed that the medication (DUI=1) accounted for 15.0%, the medication (DUI<1) accounted for 38.3%, the medication (DUI>1) accounted for 46.7%; the average of DUI was 1.30. Conclusions Base on the DUI, we draw the conclusion that the rationality of emergency drug use and the timeliness of emergency drug supply were better in Lushan earthquake than those in Wenchuan earthquake. But the rationality of using the DUI, which is an evaluation index for normal conditions, to evaluate the emergency conditions still needs to be further verified.