文章摘要
李娟娟,李晋磊,张娟,靳荣荣,马帅,邓桂娟,苏夏雯,边峰,曲翌敏,胡琳琳,江宇.国家慢性病综合防控示范区建设总体实施现状研究[J].中华流行病学杂志,2018,39(4):417-421
国家慢性病综合防控示范区建设总体实施现状研究
Study on the overall implementation status of the National Demonstration Areas for Comprehensive Prevention and Control of Non-communicable Diseases
收稿日期:2017-10-27  出版日期:2018-04-18
DOI:10.3760/cma.j.issn.0254-6450.2018.04.006
中文关键词: 国家慢性病综合防控示范区;创建;慢性病防控;实施情况
英文关键词: National Demonstration Areas for Comprehensive Prevention and Control of Non-communicable Diseases;Establishment;Chronic disease control and prevention;Implementation situation
基金项目:国家卫生和计划生育委员会委托项目
作者单位E-mail
李娟娟 100730 北京, 中国医学科学院/北京协和医学院公共卫生学院  
李晋磊 100730 北京, 中国医学科学院/北京协和医学院公共卫生学院  
张娟 100730 北京, 中国医学科学院/北京协和医学院公共卫生学院  
靳荣荣 100730 北京, 中国医学科学院/北京协和医学院公共卫生学院  
马帅 100730 北京, 中国医学科学院/北京协和医学院公共卫生学院  
邓桂娟 100730 北京, 中国医学科学院/北京协和医学院公共卫生学院  
苏夏雯 100730 北京, 中国医学科学院/北京协和医学院公共卫生学院  
边峰 100730 北京, 中国医学科学院/北京协和医学院公共卫生学院  
曲翌敏 100730 北京, 中国医学科学院/北京协和医学院公共卫生学院  
胡琳琳 100730 北京, 中国医学科学院/北京协和医学院公共卫生学院  
江宇 100730 北京, 中国医学科学院/北京协和医学院公共卫生学院 jiangyu@pumc.edu.cn 
摘要点击次数: 2802
全文下载次数: 1170
中文摘要:
      目的 了解国家慢性病综合防控示范区(示范区)自创建以来各项活动总体开展情况,为进一步开展示范区建设活动提供参考。方法 采用依据实施方案设计的问卷,调查全国参与示范区创建的机构各项目活动开展情况,每个示范区选取8个机构部门共完成12份问卷调查。结果 示范区实施情况实际得分占总分的71.8%。示范区要求开展的7项活动中,百分制得分较高的为监测(88.0%)、保障措施(75.0%)、健康教育和健康促进(75.0%);得分相对较低的是全民健康生活方式行动(67.7%)、社区诊断(66.7%)、高危人群发现和干预(64.7%)、患者管理(60.9%)。东、中、西三个地区在保障措施、健康教育和健康促进及高危人群发现和干预专项得分的差异有统计学意义。总体来讲,东部示范区实施情况优于中部和西部。示范区慢性病防控工作指标体系中的23项活动开展情况中,百分制得分最高的5项分别为政策保障、死因监测、肿瘤登记、心脑血管事件报告和烟草控制;得分最低的5项为平衡膳食、患者自我管理、口腔卫生、示范创建和基本公共卫生服务均等化。23项活动总体得分结果为东部地区得分高于中部和西部地区,中部和西部地区得分基本一致。结论 国家慢性病示范区创建各项工作总体实施情况良好,高危人群发现和干预,以及患者管理是示范区今后工作重点。
英文摘要:
      Objective To understand the current overall status of implementation on the National Demonstration Areas of Comprehensive Prevention and Control of Non-communicable Diseases. Methods According to the scheme design of the questionnaires, all the National Demonstration Areas were involved in this study. For each National Demonstration Areas, eight departments were selected to complete a total of 12 questionnaires. Results Scores related to the implementation of the National Demonstration Areas accounted for 71.8% of the total 170 points. Based on the scores gathered from this study, the 23-items-index-system that represented the status of project implementation was classified into seven categories. Categories with higher percentile scores would include:monitoring (88.0%), safeguard measures (75.0%), health education and health promotion (75.0%). Categories with lower percentile scores would include:the national health lifestyle actions (67.7%), community diagnosis (66.7%), discovery and intervention of high-risk groups (64.7%), and patient management (60.9%). There were significant differences noticed among the eastern, central and western areas on items as safeguard measures, health education/promotion, discovery and intervention of high-risk groups. In all, the implementation programs in the eastern Demonstration Areas seemed better than in the central or western regions. As for the 23 items, five of the highest scores appeared on policy support, mortality surveillance, tumor registration, reporting system on cardiovascular/cerebrovascular events, and on tobacco control, respectively. However, the lowest five scores fell on healthy diet, patient self-management program, oral hygiene, setting up the demonstration units and promotion on basic public health services, respectively. The overall scores in the eastern region was higher than that in the central or the western regions. The scores in the central and western regions showed basically the same. Conclusions The overall status of implementation on the National Demonstration Areas was satisfactory. Future attention should be focusing on patient management as well as discovery and intervention of high-risk groups, which also presented the lowest scores, in this survey.
查看全文   Html全文     查看/发表评论  下载PDF阅读器
关闭