成都市娱乐服务场所女性性工作者不同艾滋病干预方式成本效果分析  

Cost-effectiveness analysis of two intervention proposal on AIDS prevention among female sex workers in entertainment places in Chengdu City

作　　者：韩德琳[1] 罗云梅[2] 姜维华[1] 何勤英[1] 吴学庆[1] 张菊英[2] 

机构地区：[1]成都市疾病预防控制中心传染病防制科,四川成都610041 [2]四川大学华西公共卫生学院卫生统计学教研室,四川成都610041

出　　处：《中华疾病控制杂志》2012年第3期216-218,共3页Chinese Journal of Disease Control & Prevention

基　　金：四川省卫生厅科研项目(060103)

摘　　要：目的比较成都市娱乐服务场所女性性工作者(female sex workers,FSWs)两种艾滋病干预方式的成本和效果,为干预方案选择提供科学依据。方法选择有项目支持的地区作为干预地区,选择人口数、经济条件相似、仅有财政经费支持的地区作为对照,比较干预地区与对照地区干预前后的问卷调查结果和成本效果比。结果经过一年干预,对照地区减少艾滋病病毒(human immunodeficiency virus,HIV)感染人数为0.02人,成果效果比为81.50万元/人;干预地区减少HIV感染人数为1.17人,成本效果比为25.05万元/人。干预组的成本效果比低于对照组。结论对照组和干预组每避免1例HIV感染的成本远远低于治疗1例的成本,说明干预有较好的收益;且干预组的成本效果比低于对照组,干预组的方案是经济可行性较好的方案。Objective To compare the cost and effectiveness of two intervention proposal on AIDS prevention among female sex workers（FSWs） in entertainment places in Chengdu City,and to provide scientific evidence for the choice.Methods Two areas with similar population size and economy were selected to form the intervention group and control group.Participants in the intervention group received comprehensive behavior intervention,and regular behavior intervention on AIDS was applied to the control group.Questionnaire survey were conducted before and after the one-year intervention separately.Then the cost effectiveness analysis（CEA） was calculated.Results After one year of intervention,it avoided 0.02 people in control group,and avoided 1.17 people in comprehensive intervention group,respectively.The cost in control group to avoid one people infecting HIV was 815 000 yuan,in contrast,the cost in comprehensive intervention group was much lower than the control group,which was 250 500 yuan.Conclusions The cost of securing one HIV case is much higher than preventing one.the CEA of control group is much higher than intervention group,so the proposal of intervention group possesses better economic feasibility.

关 键 词：卖淫 获得性免疫缺陷综合征 干预性研究 

分 类 号：R181.2[医药卫生—流行病学]