医院感染漏报率不同统计方法的探讨  

Two Methods to Calculate Rate of Missing Report on Nosocomial Infection

作　　者：张晓炜[1] 孟黎辉[1] 郑佳[1] 董宝坤[1] 

机构地区：[1]首都医科大学附属北京同仁医院,北京100730

出　　处：《中华医院感染学杂志》2006年第1期26-28,共3页Chinese Journal of Nosocomiology

摘　　要：目的探讨不同方法确定医院感染漏报病例对计算漏报率结果产生的影响。方法以感染病例界定为住院期间感染或确定某月感染两种方法计算其漏报率,比较校正后的实际感染病例。结果两种方法计算的实际感染病例数差异有显著性(P≤0.001)。结论在进行漏报率以及其他数据的统计时,应该加强对方法的研究,特别是细节的推敲,使医院感染的流行病学资料更加完善和可靠。OBJECTIVE To investigate the different methods to calculate the rate of missing report on nosocomial infections. METHODS We had two methods to define the case of nosocomial infections, one was that the cases infected during the month we investigated, the other was that patients infected during the in hospital time. Then we got two different rates and ＂actually＂ nosocomial infection cases and compare the difference of the two results. RESULTS It was significant difference between these two results （P 〈 0. 001）. CONCLUSIONS We must strengthen the methodology research when we calculate the rate of missing report, then the epidemiology information of nosocomial infection will get more and more perfection and credibility.

关 键 词：医院感染 漏报率 

分 类 号：R181.32[医药卫生—流行病学]