四川省新型冠状病毒肺炎传染病网络报告个案调查表质量分析

Evaluation the Quality of the Case Questionnaire of the COVID-19 of the Infectious Disease Network in Sichuan Province

目的及时评价四川省传染病网络报告新型冠状病毒肺炎病例个案调查表质量,分析存在的问题及原因后反馈给21市(州),进一步提升个案调查表质量。方法对2020-01/02的新型冠状病毒肺炎病例个案调查表报告重卡率、完整率和"基本信息"、"发病与就诊"、"危险因素与暴露史"的模板完整率、准确率进行计算,采用Epinfo 7软件进行χ2检验。结果 2020年1月报告个案调查表594份,2月报告个案调查表1 210份,不包含已删除或订正为其他疾病的个案表。2020年2月份个案调查表总完整率(91.98%,1 113/1 210)高于1月(62.29%,370/594),差异有统计学意义(χ^(2)=240.16,P<0.01);2月份重卡率(1.49%)较1月有所下降(2.69%);2月底对1月份个案表进行复核,复核后个案调查表总完整率(69.61%,410/589)高于复核前完整率,差异有统计学意义(χ^(2)=7.06,P<0.01);1月复核+2月份"发病与就诊"模板准确率(98.59%,1 605/1 628)高于"危险因素与暴露史"(95.34%,1 495/1 568),差异有统计学意义(χ^(2)=28.83,P<0.01)。结论评估后个案调查表各项指标报告质量有显著提升,同时也发现监测信息系统存在的问题,建议加强对基层机构的流行病学调查和网络报告培训,改进和完善新冠肺炎个案调查信息系统设置。

objective To tTimely evaluateion of the quality of the case questionnaire for COVID-19 reported by the Infectious Disease Network in Sichuan Province;analyzesis of existing problems and its causes and feedback to 21 cities(prefectures) so as to further improve the quality of the case questionnaire. Methods The indexes of repeated reporting rate, timeliness rate and completeness rate of the COVID-19’s cases in from January to February 2020 were calculated. Meanwhile, the completeness rate and accuracy of the three parts of the case questionnaire, including "basic information","incidence and treatment","risk factors and exposure history",were calculated. Chisquare test was used by Epinfo 7. Results There were 594 reported cases in January 2020 and 1210 reported cases in February, 2020, excluding the cases that had been deleted or revised for other diseases. The total completeness rate of the questionnaire in February(91.98%,1 113/1 210) was higher than that in January(62.29%,370/594),and the difference was statistically significant (χ^(2)=240.16, P<0.01).The repeated reporting rate decreased from January(2.69%) to February(1.49%). At the end of February,the list of cases reported in January was reviewed. The total completeness rate of the questionnaire(69.61%, 410/589) after reviewing was higher than that before reviewing (χ^(2)=7.06,P<0.01). The accuracy rate of"onset and treatment"(98.59%,1 605/1 628) was higher than that of "risk factors and exposure history"(95.34%, 1 495/1 568) in January and February after reviewing (χ^(2)=28.83,P<0.01). Conclusion After the evaluation,the quality of the case questionnaire has been significantly improved,and the problems of the monitoring information system have also been found. It is suggested to strengthen the epidemiological investigation and network report training of the grass-roots institutions aiming to improve the information system of the COVID-19’s case investigation.