Suppr超能文献

阿尔汉格尔斯克地区结核病控制中被动和主动病例发现的比较。

A comparison between passive and active case finding in TB control in the Arkhangelsk region.

作者信息

Kuznetsov Vladimir N, Grjibovski Andrej M, Mariandyshev Andrey O, Johansson Eva, Bjune Gunnar A

机构信息

Institute of Health and Society, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway ; Institute of Mental Medicine, Northern State Medical University, Arkhangelsk, Russia ; International School of Public Health, Northern State Medical University, Arkhangelsk, Russia.

International School of Public Health, Northern State Medical University, Arkhangelsk, Russia ; Department of International Public Health, Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo, Norway.

出版信息

Int J Circumpolar Health. 2014 Feb 14;73:23515. doi: 10.3402/ijch.v73.23515. eCollection 2014.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

In Russia, active case finding (ACF) for certain population groups has been practiced uninterruptedly for many decades, but no studies comparing ACF and passive case finding (PCF) approaches in Russia have been published.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to describe the main differences in symptoms and diagnostic delay between patients who come to TB services through PCF and ACF strategies.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study was conducted among 453 new pulmonary tuberculosis (PTB) patients, who met criteria of TB diagnostic delay in Arkhangelsk.

RESULTS

ACF patients used self-treatment more often than PCF patients (90.1% vs. 24.6%) and 36.3% of them were alcohol abusers (as opposed to only 26.2% of PCF patients). The median patient delay (PD) in PCF was 4 weeks, IQR (1-8 weeks), and less than 1 week in ACF. Twenty-three per cent of the PCF patients were seen by a medical provider within the first week of their illness onset.

CONCLUSION

Patients diagnosed through ACF tended to under-report their TB symptoms and showed low attention to their own health. However, ACF allowed for discovering TB patients earlier than PCF, and this was also the case for alcohol abusing patients. PCF systems should be supplemented with ACF strategies.

摘要

背景

在俄罗斯,针对特定人群的主动病例发现(ACF)已持续开展了数十年,但尚未有关于俄罗斯主动病例发现与被动病例发现(PCF)方法比较的研究发表。

目的

本研究旨在描述通过被动病例发现和主动病例发现策略前来接受结核病服务的患者在症状和诊断延迟方面的主要差异。

方法

对阿尔汉格尔斯克453例符合结核病诊断延迟标准的新发肺结核(PTB)患者进行了横断面研究。

结果

主动病例发现组患者比被动病例发现组患者更常采用自我治疗(90.1%对24.6%),且其中36.3%为酗酒者(而被动病例发现组仅为26.2%)。被动病例发现组患者的中位患者延迟(PD)为4周,四分位间距(IQR)为1 - 8周,主动病例发现组则少于1周。23%的被动病例发现组患者在发病第一周内就看过医疗服务提供者。

结论

通过主动病例发现确诊的患者往往少报其结核病症状,且对自身健康关注度较低。然而,主动病例发现比被动病例发现能更早发现结核病患者,酗酒患者也是如此。被动病例发现系统应辅以主动病例发现策略。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验