检索规则说明:AND代表“并且”;OR代表“或者”;NOT代表“不包含”;(注意必须大写,运算符两边需空一格)
检 索 范 例 :范例一: (K=图书馆学 OR K=情报学) AND A=范并思 范例二:J=计算机应用与软件 AND (U=C++ OR U=Basic) NOT M=Visual
作 者:李延庆[1]
出 处:《热带病与寄生虫学》2009年第2期87-88,共2页Journal of Tropical Diseases and Parasitology
摘 要:目的评价低流行区疫村调查、密切接触者调查和可疑线索调查主动发现病人效果。方法在13个市县通过宣传发动群众、培训乡村医生、密切接触者调查、专业医生确诊等措施,以达到主动发现病人的目的。结果 13个市县共筛查270万人,发现11例麻风患者。线索凋查确诊发现率较高(7.3‰),疫村调查确诊发现率极低(0.0004‰)。结论低流行区主动发现病人投入大,发现病人少,成本效益低,应将工作重点放到基层医务人员培训和大众健康宣传,以达到早期发现病人。Objective To evaluate the efficiency of active patients detecting measures including epidemic sources investigation, close contacting interviewing and suspected clues surveying in leprosy-low-epidemic area. Methods The study was undertaken in 13 cities/counties. Several measures were taken to detect patients actively including publicizing leprosy knowledge and arousing people to find patients, training village doctors, interviewing close contacting, professional doctors diagnosing and some other measures. Results 11 cases of leprosy were screened out of 27 million peoples. The detection rate was 7.3 ‰ by the measure of suspected clues investigation, obviously higher than that by means of epidemic sources investigation (0.0004‰). Conclusion Appling active patients detecting measures to find leprosy patients in low-epidem ic area was high costing and low efficiency. In order to achieve the purpose of early detection of leprosy patients, grass-roots unit medical staff training and publicizing leprosy knowledge should be emphasized.
分 类 号:R1[医药卫生—公共卫生与预防医学]
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在链接到云南高校图书馆文献保障联盟下载...
云南高校图书馆联盟文献共享服务平台 版权所有©
您的IP:216.73.216.15