李自慧, 赵琦, 赵根明, 陆一涵, 王伟炳, 何纳. 上海市新发急性呼吸道传染病风险评估预警指标体系构建[J]. 上海预防医学, 2021, 33(7): 588-592. DOI: 10.19428/j.cnki.sjpm.2021.20583
引用本文: 李自慧, 赵琦, 赵根明, 陆一涵, 王伟炳, 何纳. 上海市新发急性呼吸道传染病风险评估预警指标体系构建[J]. 上海预防医学, 2021, 33(7): 588-592. DOI: 10.19428/j.cnki.sjpm.2021.20583
LI Zi-hui, ZHAO Qi, ZHAO Gen-ming, LU Yi-han, WANG Wei-bing, HE Na. Development of an early warning index system for emerging respiratory infectious diseases in Shanghai[J]. Shanghai Journal of Preventive Medicine, 2021, 33(7): 588-592. DOI: 10.19428/j.cnki.sjpm.2021.20583
Citation: LI Zi-hui, ZHAO Qi, ZHAO Gen-ming, LU Yi-han, WANG Wei-bing, HE Na. Development of an early warning index system for emerging respiratory infectious diseases in Shanghai[J]. Shanghai Journal of Preventive Medicine, 2021, 33(7): 588-592. DOI: 10.19428/j.cnki.sjpm.2021.20583

上海市新发急性呼吸道传染病风险评估预警指标体系构建

Development of an early warning index system for emerging respiratory infectious diseases in Shanghai

  • 摘要:
    目的构建上海市新发急性呼吸道传染病风险快速评估与持续风险追踪评估指标体系。
    方法应用德尔菲法邀请31名专家开展2轮咨询,通过在线调查问卷请专家从指标的必要性、可行性、稳定性及敏感性4个维度分别评分。
    结果2轮专家咨询表的有效回收率均为100%,专家的权威程度为0.88,第2轮专家咨询结果的协调系数为0.138(P<0.001)。研究分别建立了新发急性呼吸道传染病快速风险评估预警指标体系和新发急性呼吸道传染病风险追踪、监测评估预警指标体系。这2套指标体系从传播力、临床危重度、潜在影响3个维度出发,分别用于早期暴发预警和风险持续追踪与评估,其中,前者包含10个指标,后者包含23个指标。在新发急性呼吸道传染病快速风险评估预警指标体系中,排序前3位指标的组合权重均在0.10以上,组合权重最大的是“门急诊科流感样症状就诊率”,为0.171。在新发急性呼吸道传染病风险追踪、监测评估预警指标体系中,前8项组合权重均在0.05以上,其中“R0(基本再生数)”的权重系数最大,为0.087。
    结论基于德尔菲法构建的上海市新发急性呼吸道传染病风险评估预警指标体系可用于疾病暴发早期预警、疫情风险持续追踪,具有一定的科学性,指标的灵敏度和稳定性还有待进一步应用和评价。

     

    Abstract:
    ObjectiveTo develop an early warning index system to identify the outbreak of respiratory infectious diseases and to assess the epidemic risk of these diseases in Shanghai.
    MethodsA two-round Delphi survey with a panel of 31 experts was used to select the modifying indicators. All indicators were evaluated for necessity,feasibility,stability, and sensitivity through online questionnaires.
    ResultsThe consultation recovery rates of both rounds were 100%. The authority coefficient was 0.88, and the Kendall's W of the second-round consultation was 0.138 (P<0.001), suggesting a good coordination among experts’ opinion. Our early warning index system was developed after the two-round Delphi survey and included two sets of indicators, one for rapid risk assessment and another for monitoring and tracing risk. Both sets of the indicators involved three aspects: transmissibility, clinical severity and potential influence of emerging diseases. The rapid risk assessment system part covered 10 indicators while the risk monitor system part covered 23 indicators. In the rapid risk assessment system part, the weight value of the top three indicators were greater than 0.10, with the highest weight value of 0.171 for titled visiting rate of influenza-like illness patients in the Emergency Department or other outpatient visits. In the risk monitor system part, the weight value of the top eight indicators were greater than 0.05, and the greatest was 0.087 for R0 (basic reproductive number).
    ConclusionThe developed scientific and reliable evaluation indicator system can be used to forecast the outbreak and epidemic risk of respiratory infectious diseases. However, sensitivity and stability of the indicators need further validation and evaluation.

     

/

返回文章
返回