论文部分内容阅读
目的 评价人员技术培训对农村地区妇女妇幼保健服务的改善效果。方法 利用准人群试验设计方法 ,从 32个项目县中选择 6个县作为干预组。选择人口和经济状况与项目县类似 ,且未实施“生殖健康 /计划生育”项目的 6个县作为对照组。采用结构式问卷共访谈 3岁以下儿童的母亲 348名 ,干预组和对照组各为 1 85名和 1 6 3名。调查内容为孕产期保健的产前检查和产后访视的情况。干预措施 :统一对乡、村两级妇幼卫生人员进行 3轮为期两周理论培训 ,并安排一个月的临床进修。结果 在产前检查方面 ,干预组调查对象的平均产前检查次数高于对照组 ,分别为 6 .6 4和 5 .6 4 (P<0 .0 5 ) ;干预组平均产前检查项目数高于对照组 ,分别为 6 .71和 5 .6 7(P<0 .0 5 ) ;干预组中医生告知孕期注意事项的比例高于对照组 (P<0 .0 5 )。在 8项孕期不良症状和体征中 ,干预组调查对象平均知道 3.4 3项 ,对照组 2 .0 9项 ,两组间差异有统计学意义 (P<0 .0 5 )。在产后访视方面 ,干预组平均产后访视次数为 3.1 0次 ,对照组为 2 .5 4次 ,两组间差异有统计学意义 (P<0 .0 5 )。调查对象在接受产后访视时 ,医生仅询问了情况 ,而未做检查 ,对照组 (1 9.0 % )高于干预组 (6 .0 % )。干预组被告知避孕方法比例 (94 % )高于对照组 (78.5
Objectives To evaluate the effectiveness of technical training for women in MCH services in rural areas. Methods Using quasi-population experimental design method, 6 counties from 32 project counties were selected as the intervention group. Six counties with similar population and economic status as the project counties and without implementing the “Reproductive Health / Family Planning” project were selected as the control group. A total of 348 mothers of children under 3 years of age were interviewed by structured questionnaire, with 1 85 and 1 36 in intervention and control groups respectively. The survey included prenatal care and postnatal visits for maternal health care. Intervention: Uniformly carry out three rounds of two-week theoretical training for MCH persons at the township and village levels and arrange one-month clinical training. Results In the prenatal examination, the average number of antenatal examination in the intervention group was higher than that of the control group, respectively, 6. 64 and 5. 64 (P <0. 05); the average number of antenatal examination items in the intervention group Higher than the control group, respectively, 6 .71 and 5 .67 (P <0. 05); intervention group, the proportion of doctors notice during pregnancy notice than pregnancy (P <0.05). Among the 8 items of adverse symptoms and signs during pregnancy, the average number of respondents in the intervention group was 3.4 3 and that of the control group was 2.09, with a significant difference between the two groups (P <0.05). In terms of postpartum visits, the average number of post-partum visits was 3.1 times in the intervention group and 2.54 times in the control group, with a significant difference between the two groups (P <0.05). When receiving the postpartum visit, the doctor asked only the condition but did not do the test. The control group (9.0%) was higher than the intervention group (6.0%). Intervention group was informed that the proportion of contraceptive methods (94%) was higher than the control group (78.5