论文部分内容阅读
目的通过采取干预措施,为提高综合医院发现肺结核能力提供依据。方法采取同级别随机配对及干预前后对照研究。按不同级别医院分观察组为甲1、乙1和丙1,对照组为甲2、乙2和丙2,分别观察干预与非干预医院发现肺结核情况。结果与非干预同级相比,干预后甲1肺结核报告率、报告菌阳率和报告痰检率显著高于甲2(P=0.000,P=0.045,P=0.017),乙1肺结核报告率和报告痰检率显著高于乙2(P=0.000,P=0.024),丙1肺结核报告率和报告痰检率显著低于丙2(P=0.000,P=0.001)。干预前后的自身对照在肺结核报告率、报告菌阳率和报告痰检率3项甲1差异均无显著性(P=0.182,P=0.116,P=0.583),乙1除肺结核报告率下降外(P=0.004),其他两项差异均无显著性(P=0.909,P=0.052),丙1肺结核报告率升高(P=0.025),丙2报告痰检率升高(P=0.000)。结论干预对提高综合医院发现传染性肺结核的能力有一定影响,但应建立一套(类似丙2)完善长效的发现肺结核机制,以早期提高传染性肺结核的发现。
Objective To provide the basis for improving TB capacity in general hospitals through interventions. Methods The same level of random matching and intervention before and after the control study. According to the different levels of the hospital sub-observation group was 1, B 1 and C 1, the control group was 2, B 2 and C 2 were observed in the intervention and non-intervention hospital found tuberculosis. Results Compared with the non-intervention peers, the reported rate of T1 TB, the reported positive rate of sputum and the reported sputum rate were significantly higher than those of A2 (P = 0.000, P = 0.045, P = 0.017) (P = 0.000, P = 0.024). The report rate of pulmonary tuberculosis and the reported sputum examination rate in group C were significantly lower than those in group C (P = 0.000, P = 0.001). Before and after intervention, there was no significant difference between the three control groups (P = 0.182, P = 0.116, P = 0.583) except for the reported rate of pulmonary tuberculosis, the reported positive rate of sputum and the reported sputum rate (P = 0.004). There were no significant differences between the other two groups (P = 0.909, P = 0.052) . Conclusions Intervention has an impact on the ability to detect infectious tuberculosis in general hospitals. However, a set of long-term and effective mechanisms for detecting tuberculosis should be established to improve the detection of infectious tuberculosis in the early stage.