Objective To standardize the management of clinical trials in our hospital,reduce the incidence of protocol deviations,and provide a reference for improving the quality of clinical trials.Methods The healthcare failure mode and effect analysis(HFMEA)method was used to determine the potential failure modes of the current protocol deviation.The frequency,severity and detectability of failure modes were quantified and evaluated.The risk priority number(RPN)was calculated and the corresponding improvement measures were proposed.The RPN values before and after the implementation of HFMEA were statistically analyzed to evaluate the improvement effect.Results After the implementation of HFMEA activities,the RPN values of 14 potential failure modes decreased significantly(P<0.05);The risk level of 12 potential failure modes decreased.The HFMEA team members'ability in finding and solving problems,communication and cooperation were significantly improved.Conclusions The implementation of HFMEA activities contributes to the management of protocol deviation in clinical trials,can effectively reduce the occurrence of protocol deviation,and provides experience for improving the quality of drug clinical trials.

OBJECTIVE：To provid e reference for hospital decision-maker to select and use repaglinide and naglinide reasonably. METHODS ：Through reviewing literautre ，guideline and instruction ，full score system was estalished for comunni- cation between pharmacists and physicians ；from the aspects of clinical necessity ，effectiveness，safety，economy，medical insu- rance attribute ，essential medicine attribute ，original research attribute ，drug packaging attribute ，drug market and enterprise attributes，the Mini health technology assessment （Mini HTA ）was carried out for repaglinide and nateglinide ，and scored on the basis of weight value. RESULTS ：Repaglinide and naglinide ’s final score were 77 and 74，respectively. For type 2 diabetes，both of them could reduce postprandial blood glucose ，and had less side effect and good safety. They were both included in the medical insurance list. Both of them were original varieties ，easy to store and had a long period of validity. Although they were expensive in the treatment of type 2 diabetes，their manufacturers had a good reputation and were widely used in the world ，which was a good choice for patients with type 2 diabetes. But they were different to certain extent ；repaglinide could be used in patients with poor renal function [eGFR ＜30 mL/min] without dose adjustment ；nateglinide should be adjusted according to eGFR for renal excretion. Repaglinide was essential medicine but nateglinide wasn ’t；repaglinide didn ’t need shading storage but nateglinide did. In addition ， a variety of liver drug enzyme inducers or inhibitors may interact with the two drugs ，and special groups should be used with. CONCLUSIONS ：Mini HTA provide reference for the selection and rational use of repaglinide and nateglinide ；patients with type 2 diabetes can select suitable drug according to their own conditions and needs. When combined with other drugs ，blood glucose should be closely monitored to prevent the occurrence of hypoglycemia.