Objective To compare the clinical efficacy and side-effect rate of deficiency anemia (IDA) patients treated with intravenous iron and oral ferrous iron. Methods 118 cases of iron deficiency anemia were selected at random to receive intravenous iron (68 cases) and traditional oral ferrous (50 cases) treatment. The treatment efficacy and side-effect were followed for four weeks, and the serum levels of hemoglobin, proteins and reticulocyte count in patients were detected. Results At the end of the trial, the patients with intravenous iron treatment were all effective, and only 86% in oral ferrous iron group was effective. The reticulocyte counts in intravenous group after 3 days treatment was obviously increased. The increment of hemoglobin and reticulocyte count in intravenous group after one week treatment wassignificantly higher than thatof in oral group(P＜0.01). The recovery rate of intravenous group after four weeks was significantly higher than that of oral group (P＜0.01). There were no significant differences for side-effect in both groups (P＞0.05). Conclusion The intravenous iron treatment may be more effective to improve hemoglobin for patients with iron deficiency anemia. The time to reach natural hemoglobin for patients treated with intravenous iron is obvious shorter than that of with oral iron, and with no more side-effect reaction and complications.