ArticleRisk management and healthcare policy2025
Rational Analysis of the Utilization of Pentoxifylline in a Tertiary Hospital: Central Hospital Affiliated to Shandong First Medical University.
Article in Risk management and healthcare policy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Efficacy and safety of oral pentoxifylline on semen parameters and reproductive hormones in idiopathic male infertility: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Translational andrology and urology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the rational use, safety, and economic implications of pentoxifylline in a hospital setting and provide recommendations for its appropriate clinical application. Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted on 322 patients discharged from September to December 2020, who received pentoxifylline. Data were collected from the hospital information system, and the rationality of prescriptions was assessed based on drug instructions and guidelines. Adverse drug reactions (ADRs) were analyzed using CTCAE criteria. Economic evaluations included defined daily dose cost (DDDc) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) analyses. Results: The rational prescription rate for pentoxifylline was 38.51%, with the main irrationalities observed in indications (31.82%), dosage and usage (21.21%), contraindications (47.98%), and drug combinations (40.40%). Adverse reactions were reported in 12 cases (3.73%), primarily involving the nervous (75.00%) and digestive systems (41.67%). Most ADRs were mild (58.33%) or moderate (41.67%), with no severe cases observed. The DDDc of pentoxifylline was 143.4 yuan. Cost-effectiveness analysis demonstrated strong economic viability, with ICER values of 55.7 yuan per percentage point improvement in ulcer healing rate and 9.0 yuan per additional meter of pain-free walking distance, significantly below the willingness-to-pay threshold. Conclusion: Pentoxifylline demonstrates cost-effectiveness and manageable safety risks but has a low rational prescription rate, highlighting the need for improved clinical practices. Enhanced collaboration between pharmacists and medical staff, alongside stricter adherence to guidelines, is essential to optimizing its utilization.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.