Tratamento da deficiência do hormônio de crescimento (GH) em crianças: comparação entre o uso de canetas versus frascos/seringas para a aplicação do GH / Growth hormone (GH) deficiency treatment in children: comparison between uses of pen versus bottles/syringes on GH administration

O objetivo deste estudo foi comparar as duas apresentações de GH recombinante humano (rGH) para tratamento da deficiência de GH (DGH). Dez crianças pré-púberes portadoras de DGH foram acompanhadas durante 6 meses. Elas receberam, por 3 meses, injeções com seringa e, a seguir, com canetas por mais 3 meses. A aceitabilidade foi avaliada através de questionário. O desperdício foi calculado através da diferença entre o número de frascos/refis utilizados e o previsto para o período. A resposta ao tratamento foi avaliada pelo ganho em desvio-padrão (DP) de altura medido a cada 3 meses. Após 6 meses, 90 por cento dos pacientes/familiares afirmaram preferir a caneta em termos de facilidade técnica e dor local, e todos consideraram a caneta melhor em termos de facilidade de transporte e armazenamento. O desperdício foi menor com a caneta, assim como o custo. Concluímos que a administração de rGH através de caneta é mais conveniente, melhor aceita pelos pacientes e resulta em menor desperdício quando comparada com o tratamento por seringa.

The aim of this study was to compare two preparations of recombinant human GH (rGH) in the treatment of GH deficient patients. Ten prepubertal GH-deficient children were followed during 6 months. They received injections with syringe for 3 months, followed by pen administration for the subsequent 3 months. Acceptability was evaluated through a questionnaire. Waste of medication was calculated by the difference between the number of used bottles or refills and the calculated amount for the period. Treatment response was evaluated by SDS gain of height measured each 3 months. After 6 months, 90 percent of patients/family members declared they preferred the pen regarding technical facility and local pain, and all patients considered the pen easier to transport and store. The waste of medication was lower with pen administration, as was the final cost. We concluded that pen-administered rGH treatment is more convenient, better accepted by the patients, and leads to less waste of medication when compared to the syringe administration.

Comparison of costs for reusable and disposable syringes.

The cost for reusable and disposable syringes was studied in Maharaj Nakorn Chiang Mai Hospital, a university hospital in the northern part of Thailand. The cost for operating reusable syringes includes that for cleaning and sterilization. This consists of labour, replacement for defective syringes, tap water, electricity, depreciation of instruments. The cost for disposable items was calculated from the number of syringes used multiplied by the price of the individual size. Results showed that 34,598 syringes were used monthly from August to October 1989. The cost for reusable syringes was 84,714 baht in comparison with 81,874 baht for disposable items. The latter was cheaper by 2,840 baht per month. It is concluded that disposable syringes are cheaper, at least in this university hospital.

Comparison of costs for disposable and reusable syringes and needles in Siriraj Hospital.

The costs for disposable and re-usable syringes and needles were compared in Siriraj Hospital, in July 1988. Data were collected from all wards regarding number of items used or replaced. Labour costs for recycling re-usable items were estimated by close observation. The costs for disposable and re-usable syringes and needles were 498,039.50, 193,874.45, 69,410.00 and 27,366.95 baht respectively. It can be concluded that re-usable items cost only 36 per cent of disposable ones. It is evident that re-usable syringes and needles should be appropriate for hospitals in Thailand at present.