王建国, 刘晓峰, 万丽葵, 孙秀梅. 某疾控中心仪器配置对检验能力的影响[J]. 环境卫生学杂志, 2013, 3(5): 461-464.
    引用本文: 王建国, 刘晓峰, 万丽葵, 孙秀梅. 某疾控中心仪器配置对检验能力的影响[J]. 环境卫生学杂志, 2013, 3(5): 461-464.
    Wang Jianguo, Liu Xiaofeng, Wan Likui, Sun Xiumei. Discussion on Influence to Testing Capacity by Instrument Configuration in a Center for Disease Control and Prevention[J]. Journal of Environmental Hygiene, 2013, 3(5): 461-464.
    Citation: Wang Jianguo, Liu Xiaofeng, Wan Likui, Sun Xiumei. Discussion on Influence to Testing Capacity by Instrument Configuration in a Center for Disease Control and Prevention[J]. Journal of Environmental Hygiene, 2013, 3(5): 461-464.

    某疾控中心仪器配置对检验能力的影响

    Discussion on Influence to Testing Capacity by Instrument Configuration in a Center for Disease Control and Prevention

    • 摘要:
      目的 通过对北京市通州区疾控中心仪器配置和检验能力的统计分析, 探讨基层疾控中心仪器配置对检验能力的影响, 为更好的地开展检验工作提供参考, 为政府部门制定疾控体系建设提供建议。
      方法 调查通州区疾控中心仪器配置、检验能力, 采用Excel 2010统计, 与原卫生部制定的《省、地、县级疾病预防控制中心实验室建设指导意见》、《北京市区县疾控机构实验室仪器标准》、《疾病预防控制中心绩效考核标准》比较分析。
      结果 和与原卫生部标准比较, 中心A类、B类、C类仪器配置率分别为73.7%、29.2%、24.1%, 总体检验设备达标率为54.4%;与北京市区县疾控标准相比, 达标率为45.0%。A类检验项目开展率为60.2%, 未开展项目的原因中, 仪器不足的影响占28.9%。
      结论 仪器配置和检验项目开展率二者与标准的要求有很大的差距, 仪器不足已经严重影响检验能力的提高。应该合理利用各类资源, 确保相应的仪器投入, 提高检验技术能力, 更好地开展公共卫生检验工作。

       

      Abstract:
      Objectives Through the statistics and analysis of instrument configuration and testing capacity in center for disease control and prevention (CDC) in Beijing Tongzhou district, we discussed the influence of instrument configuration on testing capacity in grass-root CDC, and hope to provide reference for better implementation of the detection work, so as to provide advice for government departments responsible for CDC system construction.
      Methods Survey instrument configuration and testing capacity in Tongzhou district CDC using excel 2010 count, then make a comparative analysis among the standard from Ministry of Health, CDC performance appraisal standard and Beijing district CDC standard.
      Results The rates of instrument configuration of A, B and C types were 73.7%, 29.2% and 24.1% respectively by the national standard in Tongzhou CDC, the overall standardizing rates was 54.4%; if compared with the standard of Beijing district CDC, the standardizing rates was 45.0%. The implementation rates of testing projects of A type was 60.2%, instrument deficiency accounted for 28.9% in the reasons for uncarried projects.
      Conclusions There is a a big gap in the instrument configuration rate and the rate of testing projects, compared with the standard, instrument shortage has a serious bad impact on the testing capacity. We should make use of all kinds of resource, make sure the equipment investment for maintaining a good testing capacity and a better development of public health inspection work.

       

    /

    返回文章
    返回