摘要
目的评价SARS接触者家庭隔离和集中隔离两种隔离方法,以寻求经济有效的隔离医学观察措施.方法择选嘉兴市2003年SARS流行期间采用家庭隔离集中隔离的所有接触者作为研究对象,采用隔离点调查问卷方式对各个隔离点进行调查,调查隔离期间被隔离者直接费用和间接费用.结果嘉兴市共隔离了385例接触者,隔离期间总共花费的直接费用732920.00元,平均每人花费1903.69±972.96元.在间接费用中,隔离期间总共花费9281.4天,平均每人花费24.1天.其中,平均每例被隔离者在家隔离观察总的直接花费是244.22(211.93~276.50)元,明显低于集中隔离组2240.77(2166.09~2315.45)元;但间接费用中,平均每例被隔离者在家隔离观察要花费37.44(33.81~41.06)天,而集中隔离者平均花费21.40(20.35~22.45)天,在家隔离治疗者隔离的总的间接费用要高于集中隔离者.结论实践证明集中隔离和家庭隔离都是有效的;但集中隔离总费用明显高于家庭隔离.
Objective To explore the economic and effective method of medical observation by comparing quarantine cost between at home and at assembly sites. Methods Subjects were all contactors during server acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) epidemic in Jiaxing, who were quarantined at home or at assembly sites. Using questionnaires, a retrospective survey was conducted to investigate the direct and indirect cost of the subjects during quarantine period. Results A total of 385 SAPS contactors were quarantined in Jiaxing. The overall direct cost during the quarantine period was 732920.00 yuan with the average cost of 1903.69 ± 972.96 yuan. The total indirect cost was 9281.4 days with the average cost of 24.1 days. The average direct cost for quarantine at home, that was 244.22 yuan (211.93 - 276.50 yuan), was significant less than that for quarantine at assembly sites (P 〈 0.01 ), which was 2240.77 yuan (2166.09 - 2315.45 yuan). The indirect cost for quarantine at home (37.44 days (33.81 -41.06 days)), was higher than that for quarantine at assembly site (21.40 days (20.35 - 22.45 days). Conclusions Quarantine both at home and at assembly sites are proved to be effective. However, the cost for cuarantine at assembly sites is significantly higher than that for quarantine at home.
出处
《浙江预防医学》
2005年第10期6-8,共3页
Zhejiang Journal of Preventive Medicine