论文部分内容阅读
目的比较实施一般健康干预(即一般干预)与强化健康干预(即强化干预)后,对机关干部血脂异常治疗效果的影响。方法 2010年6-10月,采取随机抽样的方法从长沙市10家三级甲等医院中抽得1 930名机关干部,对完成体检后的血脂异常者726名实施一般干预,同样方法另外随机抽得239名机关干部,体检后对检出的104名血脂异常者实施强化干预。结果 726名血脂异常者经过一般干预后血脂达标率为11.98%,实施强化干预后104名血脂异常者血脂达标率为30.77%,两种干预后达标率比较,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);一般干预和强化干预后血脂均值比较,TC、LDL、HDL差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论强化干预是血脂异常更有效防治措施。
Objective To compare the effects of general health intervention (ie general intervention) and intensive health intervention (ie intensive intervention) on the treatment effect of dyslipidemia in cadres. Methods From June to October 2010, 1 930 cadres were recruited from 10 tertiary hospitals in Changsha City by random sampling method, and 726 people who had completed the examination of dyslipidemia were subjected to general intervention. In the same way, they were randomized Extraction of 239 cadres, physical examination on the detection of 104 patients with dyslipidemia intensive intervention. Results 726 subjects with dyslipidemia achieved a blood lipid compliance rate of 11.98% after general intervention. The blood lipid compliance rate of 104 subjects with dyslipidemia after intensive intervention was 30.77%. There was significant difference between the two interventions (P <0.05) ). There was significant difference of TC, LDL, HDL between the general intervention and the mean serum lipid after intervention (P <0.05). Conclusion Intensive intervention is a more effective prevention and treatment of dyslipidemia.