Green L A, Reed F M, Martini C, Warren P S, Simmons R L, Marshall J A
J Fam Pract. 1979 Dec;9(6):1075-80.
An analysis of one year's data from family practices in Colorado tested the hypothesis that there are no significant differences in the proportion of patients with problems in each of the 18 major International Classification of Health Problems in Primary Care (ICHPPC) categories among visiting patients in rural, urban, and teaching family practices. Four rural, three urban, and five residency practices participated in the study from January 1, 1978, through December 31, 1978. Transient patients were excluded. There were 25,525 patients included in the study. Each setting was compared with the other two settings in each of the 18 ICHPPC categories. More than half of the comparisons differed at the .001 significance level, and the setting with a significantly greater proportion of visiting patients with diseases in a given category was identified. These differences may have implications for disease surveillance, the planning for delivery of primary health care in different settings, and the preparation of health care providers for practice.
一项对科罗拉多州家庭医疗一年数据的分析,检验了这样一个假设:在农村、城市和教学型家庭医疗的就诊患者中,按照《初级保健国际卫生问题分类》(ICHPPC)18个主要类别划分,各类别中存在问题的患者比例没有显著差异。1978年1月1日至1978年12月31日期间,四家农村、三家城市和五家住院医师培训诊所参与了该研究。临时患者被排除在外。该研究共纳入25525名患者。在ICHPPC的18个类别中,将每种医疗环境与其他两种医疗环境进行比较。超过一半的比较在0.001的显著性水平上存在差异,并确定了在某一特定类别中就诊患者疾病比例显著更高的医疗环境。这些差异可能对疾病监测、不同环境下初级卫生保健服务的规划以及医疗服务提供者的执业准备产生影响。