本文選題：急性弛緩性麻痹監(jiān)測人員 + 脊髓灰質(zhì)炎疫苗�。� 參考：《中國疫苗和免疫》2017年02期

【摘要】：目的了解2016年省級急性弛緩性麻痹(Acute flaccid paralysis,AFP)監(jiān)測人員對脊髓灰質(zhì)炎(脊灰)疫苗免疫策略轉(zhuǎn)換的認(rèn)知度。方法抽取全國(未包括香港、澳門特別行政區(qū)和臺灣地區(qū))31個(gè)省(自治區(qū)、直轄市)64名省級AFP監(jiān)測人員進(jìn)行問卷調(diào)查,對數(shù)據(jù)進(jìn)行描述性流行病學(xué)分析。結(jié)果調(diào)查對象對全球脊灰野病毒流行類型、脊灰新疫苗及程序、脊灰實(shí)驗(yàn)室方面內(nèi)容的認(rèn)知度分別為35.94%(23/64)、88.28%(113/128)、93.75%(180/192)。84.38%(56/64)的調(diào)查對象認(rèn)為新脊灰疫苗和免疫程序?qū)臃N率有影響,原因?yàn)橐呙绻⿷?yīng)不足、不信任疫苗接種、引入二價(jià)脊灰減毒活疫苗(Bivalent oral attenuated poliovirus vaccine,bOPV)、引入國產(chǎn)脊灰滅活疫苗(Inactivated polio vaccine,IPV)、公眾疑慮等。調(diào)查對象認(rèn)為單例疫苗衍生脊灰病毒(Vaccine-derived poliovirus,VDPV)檢出風(fēng)險(xiǎn)較高,循環(huán)VDPV(Circulating VDPV,cVDPV)檢出風(fēng)險(xiǎn)較低;78.88%(46/64)的調(diào)查對象認(rèn)為在脊灰疫苗免疫策略轉(zhuǎn)換后需更加重視Ⅱ型免疫缺陷者VDPV(Immunodeficient VDPV,iVDPV)。結(jié)論 AFP監(jiān)測人員對脊灰疫苗免疫策略轉(zhuǎn)換的認(rèn)知度較低,對引入IPV的意義認(rèn)識不足,應(yīng)加強(qiáng)對AFP監(jiān)測人員的培訓(xùn),以促進(jìn)策略的順利實(shí)施。
[Abstract]:Objective to investigate the awareness of provincial acute flaccid paralysis (AFP) surveillance staff on poliomyelitis (poliomyelitis) vaccine immunization strategy change in 2016. Methods A total of 64 provincial AFP monitors from 31 provinces (including Hong Kong, Macao Special Administrative region and Taiwan) were investigated by questionnaire, and the data were analyzed by descriptive epidemiology. Results the survey subjects' awareness of the global epidemic types of wild poliovirus, new polio vaccines and procedures, and polio laboratory contents were 35.94 / 64 / 88.28 / 128 / 93.7575 / 180 / 84.38 / 5664%, respectively. The survey subjects considered that the new polio vaccine and immunization procedures had an impact on the coverage rate. The reasons are insufficient supply of vaccine, distrust of vaccination, introduction of bivalent oral attenuated poliovirus vaccine, introduction of domestic inactivated polio vaccine, public doubt, etc. The survey subjects considered that the risk of detection of vaccine-derived poliovirusus virus (VDPVV) was higher, and the risk of detection of circulating VDPVcVDPVV was lower (78.8888 / 46 / 64). The subjects considered that more attention should be paid to VDPV(Immunodeficient VDPV-iVDPVs in patients with type 鈪，

本文編號：1890008