Email Alert | RSS    帮助

中国防痨杂志 ›› 2021, Vol. 43 ›› Issue (12): 1292-1296.doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-6621.2021.12.011

• 论著 • 上一篇    下一篇

陕西省经济欠发达地区肺结核患者就诊行为分析

张宏伟*, 阮云洲(), 张天华, 邓亚丽, 熊德明, 刘希波   

  1. 710048 西安,陕西省结核病防治研究所(张宏伟、张天华、邓亚丽、熊德明、刘希波);中国疾病预防控制中心结核病预防控制中心耐药防治部(阮云洲)
  • 收稿日期:2021-08-20 出版日期:2021-12-10 发布日期:2021-12-01
  • 通信作者: 阮云洲 E-mail:ruanyz@chinacdc.cn
  • 基金资助:
    探索提高贫困地区肺结核发现(0525)

Analysis of visit behavior of pulmonary tuberculosis patients in underdeveloped areas of Shaanxi

ZHANG Hong-wei*, RUAN Yun-zhou(), ZHANG Tian-hua, DENG Ya-li, XIONG De-ming, LIU Xi-bo   

  1. *Shaanxi Provincial Institute for Tuberculosis Control and Prevention, Xi’an 710048, China
  • Received:2021-08-20 Online:2021-12-10 Published:2021-12-01
  • Contact: RUAN Yun-zhou E-mail:ruanyz@chinacdc.cn

摘要:

目的 分析“探索提高贫困地区肺结核发现”项目实施地区肺结核患者就诊行为,为制定经济欠发达地区肺结核患者发现措施提供依据。 方法 收集《结核病管理信息系统》2017—2020年登记的“现住址”为项目县(清涧县和子洲县)的875例肺结核患者个案信息。项目实施前(2017年1月1日至2018年12月31日)患者共441例,项目期间(2019年1月1日至2020年12月31日)患者共434例。采用Excel 2016将《传染病报告信息管理系统》与《结核病管理信息系统》患者信息进行匹配和整理;对项目地区项目实施前和项目实施期间肺结核患者外诊比例、就诊延迟率、诊断延迟率进行分析。 结果 项目实施期间肺结核患者外诊构成比为84.10%(365/434),高于项目实施前外诊构成比[62.81%(277/441)],差异有统计学意义(χ2=50.74,P=0.000)。2017—2020年项目县肺结核就诊延迟率为48.34%(423/875),诊断延迟率为18.63%(163/875),其中项目实施期间就诊延迟率[52.76%(229/434)]高于项目实施前[43.99%(194/441)],差异有统计学意义(χ2=6.74,P=0.009);项目实施前诊断延迟率[23.36%(103/441)]高于项目实施期间的诊断延迟率[13.82%(60/434)],差异有统计学意义(χ2=13.11,P=0.000)。外地首诊患者项目实施前诊断延迟率[33.94%(94/277)]高于项目实施期间的诊断延迟率[15.07%(55/365)],差异有统计学意义(χ2=31.45,P=0.000);项目县首诊患者项目实施期间就诊延迟率[73.91%(51/69)]高于项目实施前[48.78%(80/164)],差异有统计学意义(χ2=12.46,P=0.000)。首诊在定点医院的患者项目实施前诊断延迟率[16.53%(60/363)]高于项目实施期间[7.58%(27/356)],差异有统计学意义(χ2=13.52,P=0.000);首诊在非定点医院的患者项目实施期间就诊延迟率[32.05%(25/78)]高于项目实施前[24.36%(19/78)],差异有统计学意义(χ2=29.82,P=0.000)。 结论 项目实施期间,陕西省经济欠发达地区肺结核患者外诊比例增高,患者就诊延迟没有明显改善,诊断延迟有所改善,需进一步采取综合措施改善患者就诊行为,加强分级诊疗,降低患者就诊延迟。

关键词: 结核, 诊室就医, 就诊延迟, 诊断延迟

Abstract:

Objective To analyzed the visit behavior of pulmonary tuberculosis (PTB) patients in the areas where the project of “Exploring and improving the detection level of tuberculosis in underdeveloped areas” were implemented, to provide basis for formulating the detection measures of PTB patients in underdeveloped areas. Methods Data of 875 PTB cases, whose “current address” were Qingjian and Zizhou registered from 2017 to 2020, were collected from TB Management Information System. Of these cases, 441 were registered before the implementation of the project (January 1, 2017-December 31, 2018), and 434 were registered during the project (January 1, 2019-December 31, 2020). Information of patients from Infectious Disease Reporting Information System and TB Management Information System were matched using Excel 2016. The non-local diagnosis rate (NDR), delayed rate (PDR) of visit and delayed rate (DDR) of diagnosis before and during the implementation of project were analyzed. Results The NDR of PTB during the implementation of the project was significantly higher than that before the implementation of the project (84.10% (365/434) vs. 62.81% (277/441), χ 2=50.74, P=0.000). From 2017 to 2020, PDR was 48.34% (423/875) and DDR was 18.63% (163/875) in Qingjian and Zizhou. The PDR during the implementation of the project was significantly higher than that before the implementation of the project (52.76% (229/434) vs. 43.99% (194/441), χ 2=6.74, P=0.009); the DDR before the implementation of the project was significantly lower than that during the implementation (23.36% (103/441) vs. 13.82% (60/434), χ 2=13.11, P=0.000). DDR of PTB whose first visit were non-local before the implementation of the project was significantly higher than that during the significantly (33.94% (94/277) vs. 15.07% (55/365), χ 2=31.45, P=0.000). PDR of PTB whose first visit in Qingjian and Zizhou were significantly higher than before the implementation (73.91% (51/69) vs. 48.78% (80/164), χ 2=12.46, P=0.000). As to patients first diagnosed in designated hospitals, the DDR before the implementation of the project was significantly higher than that during the implementation (16.53% (60/363) vs. 7.58% (27/356), χ 2=13.52, P=0.000); in the other hospital, the PDR during the implementation of the project was significantly higher than before the implementation (32.05% (25/78) vs. 24.36% (19/78),χ 2=29.82, P=0.000). Conclusion During the implementation of the project, the NDR of PTB patients in underdeveloped areas increased, visit delay was not significantly improved, while diagnosis delay was improved. Comprehensive measures should be taken to improve visit behavior, graded diagnosis and treatment should be strengthened, and visit delay should be reduced.

Key words: Tuberculosis, Office visits, Patient delay, Diagnosis delay