论文部分内容阅读
目的:探索留守儿童免疫预防对策。方法:将事先制定好的干预方案免疫对策与措施按照要求在全县实施后,在20个乡镇(区)中用随机抽样的方法从每个乡镇随机抽取2个村,每村调查10名适龄儿童,了解其免疫状况,并根据其父母外出情况判断调查儿童为留守儿童或常规儿童,将留守儿童和常规儿童接种情况进行比较,评估干预免疫对策与措施效果。资料用Excel2003录入,用χ2检验或四格表精确概率法分析。结果:本次采用了查漏补种、健康教育、增加服务模式、加强督导、实施信息化管理和建立部门联合的长效机制等综合性措施。现场共调查适龄儿童400名,其中常规儿童300名,留守儿童93名,外地来怀临时居住儿童7名,常规儿童和留守儿童“五苗”全程免疫接种率分别为97.33%和94.62%,经统计学分析,二者无显著性差异(χ校2=0.89,P>0.05)。调查显示,实施干预免疫对策与措施后,留守儿童各种疫苗接种率和接种及时率也与常规儿童基本一致,无显著性差异,而留守儿童各种疫苗接种率和接种及时率在干预免疫对策与措施实施前后有显著性差异。结论:采取的留守儿童免疫预防干预措施对策是切实可行的,可以有效提高留守儿童免疫接种水平。
Objective: To explore immunization prevention strategies for left-behind children. Methods: According to the requirements of the pre-established intervention programs in the county after the implementation of immunization in 20 townships (districts) using a random sampling method from each township randomly selected 2 villages, each village survey 10 age Children to understand their immune status, and according to their parents go out to determine the situation of children as left-behind children or regular children, children left behind and routine immunization were compared to assess the impact of interventions and measures to counter the effects of immunization. Data input with Excel2003, with χ2 test or four grid table accurate probability analysis. Results: This time, comprehensive measures were adopted such as checking leaks and replanting, health education, increasing service mode, strengthening supervision, implementing information management and establishing long-term mechanism of departmental alliance. A total of 400 school-age children were investigated at the scene, including 300 routine children, 93 left-behind children and 7 temporary children living in the field. The full-course vaccination rates for routine children and left-behind children were 97.33% and 94.62% There was no significant difference between them (χ school 2 = 0.89, P> 0.05). Survey shows that after the implementation of interventions and measures of immunization, left behind children vaccination rate and vaccination and timely rate is also consistent with conventional children, no significant difference, while the left behind children vaccination rate and vaccination timely intervention in the immune strategy Before and after the implementation of the measures have significant differences. Conclusion: It is practicable to take measures to prevent immunization of left behind children, which can effectively raise the level of immunization of left behind children.