2017年成都市锦江区疑似预防接种异常反应监测分析
|
摘要
目的了解成都市锦江区疑似预防接种异常反应(Adverse Event Following Immunization,AEFI)的发生特征,评价AEFI监测系统运转情况、疫苗的安全性及预防接种的服务质量。方法通过中国免疫规划信息管理系统收集全区2017年发生的AEFI个案数据,采用描述性流行病学方法进行分析。结果 2017年成都市锦江区16个街道34家接种单位共报告234例AEFI病例,报告单位覆盖率、48 h内报告率、48 h内调查率、调查后7 d内完成初步调查报告率、调查后3 d内报告率、个案调查表关键项目填写完整率、AEFI分类率7项监测指标均达100%。在报告病例中,男、女性别比为1.11∶1;1岁及以下占71.37%;5月、6月报告最多。报告发生率为61.78/10万,相比2013年49.21/10万上升了25.54%,其中一般反应发生率59.66/10万,主要表现为发热、局部红肿硬结;异常反应发生率2.11/10万,主要表现为过敏性皮疹,无严重异常反应报告。在不良反应种,2017年一般反应占比96.58%,相比2013年80.60%增加了19.82%;2017年异常反应占比3.42%,相比2013年18.66%下降了81.67%。无疫苗质量事故、接种事故、偶合症和心因性反应报告。结论 2017年成都市锦江区AEFI监测系统运转情况良好,AEFI监测敏感性明显提高;全区使用的疫苗安全;预防接种服务质量良好。
Objective To understand the characteristics of Adverse Event Following Immunization(AEFI) occurence in Jinjiang District,Chengdu. And to evaluate the operation of AEFI monitoring system, the safety of vaccine and the quality of vaccination services. Methods AEFI case data of the whole district in 2017 were collected through the National Immunization Program Information Management System(NIPIMS), and it was analyzed by descriptive epidemiological methods.Results A total of 234 AEFI cases were reported by 34 vaccination units in 16 streets of Jinjiang district of Chengdu in 2017. Seven monitoring indicators which were including unit coverage,reporting rate within 48 hours,investigation rate within 48 hours, completion of the preliminary investigation report rate within 7 days after investigation, reporting rate within 3 days after the investigation, completion rate of the key items of the case questionnaire were reported. All of the above indicators were 100% completed.Among the reported cases, the ratio of male to female was 1.11∶1; patients in 1 year old and below accounted for 71.37%;In May and June the reports were the most. The reported incidence rate was 61.78/10~5(with an increase of 25.54% compared with 49.21/10~5 in 2013), of which the general reaction rate was 59.66/10~5, the main manifestations were fever, local swelling and induration; The abnormal reaction rate was 2.11/10~5, the symptom mainly manifested as allergic rash, and there was no serious abnormal reaction report; Among adverse reactions, the general reaction in 2017 accounted for 96.58%, which had a 19.82% increase compared with 80.60% in2013. The abnormal reaction in 2017 accounted for 3.42%, which was 81.67% lower than the18.66% in 2013. There was no vaccine quality accident, vaccination accident, coincidental event and psychogenic reaction report. Conclusion In 2017, the AEFI monitoring system in Jinjiang district of Chengdu worked well,the sensitivity of AEFI monitoring was significantly improved;the vaccine was safely used in the whole district;the quality of the vaccination service was excellent.
Objective To understand the characteristics of Adverse Event Following Immunization(AEFI) occurence in Jinjiang District,Chengdu. And to evaluate the operation of AEFI monitoring system, the safety of vaccine and the quality of vaccination services. Methods AEFI case data of the whole district in 2017 were collected through the National Immunization Program Information Management System(NIPIMS), and it was analyzed by descriptive epidemiological methods.Results A total of 234 AEFI cases were reported by 34 vaccination units in 16 streets of Jinjiang district of Chengdu in 2017. Seven monitoring indicators which were including unit coverage,reporting rate within 48 hours,investigation rate within 48 hours, completion of the preliminary investigation report rate within 7 days after investigation, reporting rate within 3 days after the investigation, completion rate of the key items of the case questionnaire were reported. All of the above indicators were 100% completed.Among the reported cases, the ratio of male to female was 1.11∶1; patients in 1 year old and below accounted for 71.37%;In May and June the reports were the most. The reported incidence rate was 61.78/10~5(with an increase of 25.54% compared with 49.21/10~5 in 2013), of which the general reaction rate was 59.66/10~5, the main manifestations were fever, local swelling and induration; The abnormal reaction rate was 2.11/10~5, the symptom mainly manifested as allergic rash, and there was no serious abnormal reaction report; Among adverse reactions, the general reaction in 2017 accounted for 96.58%, which had a 19.82% increase compared with 80.60% in2013. The abnormal reaction in 2017 accounted for 3.42%, which was 81.67% lower than the18.66% in 2013. There was no vaccine quality accident, vaccination accident, coincidental event and psychogenic reaction report. Conclusion In 2017, the AEFI monitoring system in Jinjiang district of Chengdu worked well,the sensitivity of AEFI monitoring was significantly improved;the vaccine was safely used in the whole district;the quality of the vaccination service was excellent.
引文
[1]国家卫生和计划生育委员会.预防接种工作规范(2016年版)[Z].2016.
[2]卫生部,国家食品药品监督管理局.全国疑似预防接种异常反应监测方案[Z].2010.
[3]熊伟,陈悦.2013年成都市锦江区疑似预防接种异常反应监测结果分析[J].预防医学情报杂志,2015,31(4):289-291.
[4]叶家楷,李克莉,许涤沙,等.中国2015年疑似预防接种异常反应监测分析[J].中国疫苗和免疫,2017,23(10):481-511.
[5]杨汝沛,郑柯,张量智.2012年成都市疑似预防接种异常反应监测结果分析[J].预防医学情报杂志,2014,30(6):480-483.
[6]马千里,方刚,漆琪,等.四川省2013年疑似预防接种异常反应监测结果分析[J].职业卫生与病伤,2015,30(4):223-226.
[7]叶家楷,李克莉,许涤沙,等.中国2014年疑似预防接种异常反应信息管理系统监测数据分析[J].中国疫苗和免疫,2016,22(2):125-137.
[8]王婧,姜铭波,陆瑾,等.2016年上海市黄浦区疑似预防接种异常反应监测结果[J].职业与健康,2017,33(20):2828-2830.
[9]石艳艳,黄云,徐爱强.2016年泰安市疑似预防接种异常反应监测[J].预防医学论坛,2017,23(12):950-952.
[10]赵晓燕,陈曦,蓝海波.2015年成都市成华区疑似预防接种异常反应监测结果分析[J].预防医学情报杂志,2018,34(4):525-529.
[11]王涛,杨俊英,范肖肖,等.2015-2016年北京市昌平区疑似预防接种异常反应监测结果分析[J].中国疫苗和免疫,2017,23(3):317-321.
[12]杨琼,胡榕.2010-2014年成都市金牛区疑似预防接种异常反应监测结果分析[J].预防医学情报杂志,2016,32(10):1053-1057.
[2]卫生部,国家食品药品监督管理局.全国疑似预防接种异常反应监测方案[Z].2010.
[3]熊伟,陈悦.2013年成都市锦江区疑似预防接种异常反应监测结果分析[J].预防医学情报杂志,2015,31(4):289-291.
[4]叶家楷,李克莉,许涤沙,等.中国2015年疑似预防接种异常反应监测分析[J].中国疫苗和免疫,2017,23(10):481-511.
[5]杨汝沛,郑柯,张量智.2012年成都市疑似预防接种异常反应监测结果分析[J].预防医学情报杂志,2014,30(6):480-483.
[6]马千里,方刚,漆琪,等.四川省2013年疑似预防接种异常反应监测结果分析[J].职业卫生与病伤,2015,30(4):223-226.
[7]叶家楷,李克莉,许涤沙,等.中国2014年疑似预防接种异常反应信息管理系统监测数据分析[J].中国疫苗和免疫,2016,22(2):125-137.
[8]王婧,姜铭波,陆瑾,等.2016年上海市黄浦区疑似预防接种异常反应监测结果[J].职业与健康,2017,33(20):2828-2830.
[9]石艳艳,黄云,徐爱强.2016年泰安市疑似预防接种异常反应监测[J].预防医学论坛,2017,23(12):950-952.
[10]赵晓燕,陈曦,蓝海波.2015年成都市成华区疑似预防接种异常反应监测结果分析[J].预防医学情报杂志,2018,34(4):525-529.
[11]王涛,杨俊英,范肖肖,等.2015-2016年北京市昌平区疑似预防接种异常反应监测结果分析[J].中国疫苗和免疫,2017,23(3):317-321.
[12]杨琼,胡榕.2010-2014年成都市金牛区疑似预防接种异常反应监测结果分析[J].预防医学情报杂志,2016,32(10):1053-1057.