Email Alert | RSS

Journal of Tuberculosis and Lung Health ›› 2015, Vol. 4 ›› Issue (4): 223-227.doi: 10.3969/j.issn.2095-3755.2015.04.004

• Original Articles • Previous Articles     Next Articles

Study on adverse drug reactions of interventional and non-interventional therapy for pulmonary tuberculosis

HUANG Yi-huan, CHEN Wei-sheng, CHEN Zhen-qiang   

  1. The Third People’s Hospital, Shantou City, Guangdong, Shantou 515073,China
  • Received:2015-11-10 Online:2015-12-30 Published:2015-12-30
  • Contact: CHEN Wei-sheng,Email:stchenws@163.com

Abstract: Objective To evaluate the clinical significance of interventional therapy for pulmonary tuberculosis (PTB) through monitoring the occurrence of the adverse drug reactions of the therapy.Methods 286 PTB patients who were over the age of 14 and had no dysfunction in liver, kidney, heart and eyes, hospitalized in the Third People’s Hospital of Shantou from Jan. 1st, 2014 to Jun. 30th, 2015 were enrolled. The patients were divided into intervention group (167 cases) and non-intervention group (119 cases) according to their treatment methods after collecting the information of their medical records. The adverse reactions of these two groups were observed in the two-month therapy.Results The adverse reaction rate of the 286 patients was 35.3% (101/286). It was 37.7% (63/167) for the intervention group and 31.9% (38/119) for the non-intervention group respectively. There was no statistically significant difference between these two groups (χ2=1.02, P>0.05). Additionally, after comparing the adverse reaction rates of the patients with different gender (male: 27.5% (46/167) and 23.5% (28/119); female:10.2% (17/167) and 8.4% (10/119)), history of alcohol intake (yes: 9.0% (15/167) and 9.2% (11/119); no: 28.7% (48/167) and 22.7% (27/119)), history of diabetes (yes: 6.0% (10/167) and 4.2% (5/119); no: 31.7% (53/167) and 27.7% (33/119)) in the two groups, there was no statistically significant difference (χ2=0.00, 0.33 and 0.61, all P values >0.05). The adverse drug reaction rates of the intervention group treated for 1 week, 2 weeks and 3 weeks were 4.2% (7/167), 6.0% (10/167) and 6.6% (11/167) respectively while those in non-intervention group were 5.0% (6/119), 10.1% (12/119) and 6.7% (8/119), with no statistical significance (χ2=0.12,1.64 and 0.00, all P values >0.05). The incidence rates of hepatic dysfunction and light hepatic injury, moderate and more serious hepatic injury were 15.6% (26 cases) and 3.0% (5 cases) for the intervention group, while those were 10.1% (12 cases) and 5.0% (6 cases) for the control group. The incidence rate of moderate and more serious moderate hepatic injury was significantly lower that of hepatic dysfunction and light hepatic injury (χ2=16.27, P<0.01).Conclusion Clinical interventional therapy do not apparently increase the incidence of adverse drug reactions.