本文選題：檢疫　切入點(diǎn)：出血熱　出處：《中華疾病控制雜志》2016年10期

【摘要】：通過(guò)比較中美兩國(guó)衛(wèi)生檢疫體制的不同和兩國(guó)在埃博拉出血熱疫情防控中的主要做法,分析兩國(guó)衛(wèi)生檢疫的異同。本文主要討論了中美兩國(guó)在口岸篩查、指定口岸入境、援助疫情國(guó)以及感染病例回國(guó)隔離治療等方面的差異,對(duì)于中國(guó)進(jìn)一步做好衛(wèi)生檢疫工作提出了建設(shè)性的看法。提出了"積極支援疫情發(fā)生國(guó)","強(qiáng)化交通運(yùn)輸檢疫和口岸檢疫","穩(wěn)步提升本國(guó)公共衛(wèi)生水平"國(guó)際間傳染病防控三原則。
[Abstract]:By comparing the differences of health quarantine system between China and the United States and the main methods of prevention and control of Ebola haemorrhagic fever in the two countries, the similarities and differences of health quarantine between the two countries are analyzed.This paper mainly discusses the differences between China and the United States in port screening, designated port entry, assistance to epidemic countries and the return of infected cases to quarantine treatment, and puts forward constructive views for China to do a good job in health and quarantine work.Three principles of international infectious disease prevention and control are put forward such as "actively supporting the countries where the epidemic occurs", "strengthening the quarantine of transportation and port", and "steadily raising the level of public health in our country".
【作者單位】： 天津出入境檢驗(yàn)檢疫局衛(wèi)生檢疫監(jiān)管處;國(guó)家質(zhì)量技術(shù)監(jiān)督與檢驗(yàn)檢疫總局衛(wèi)生司;
【分類(lèi)號(hào)】：R183;R512.8
，

本文編號(hào)：1728770