CAJ | 학술논문

目的探讨中国男男性接触者(MSM)中不同经济收入人群艾滋病高危性行为状况.方法采用定向抽样方法,对9个城市2250例MSM进行匿名问卷调查,比较高、中、低经济收入人群的高危性行为发生状况.结果高和中等收入组累计同性性伴数(平均分别为110.17个和71.97个)、同性口交性伴数(平均分别为62.45个和46.6个)、同性肛交性伴数(平均分别为52.21个和32.3个)均明显高于低收入组(P＜0.01),高收入组累计同性性伴数、同性口交性伴数及同性肛交性伴数均明显高于中等收入组(P＜0.05).高和中等收入组最近一次肛交安全套使用率(分别为79.03%和77.29%)明显高于低收入组(P＜0.01).高收入组最近一次与男性性工作者性交(3.81%)百分率明显高于中等及低收入组(P＜0.01).高和中等收人组曾经向男性"买"性(分别为24.27%和14.7%)的百分率明显高于低收入组(P＜0.01),高收入组曾经向男性"买"性的百分率明显高于中等收入组(P＜0.01).高和中等收入组是男性性工作者(分别为6.72%和11.05%)的百分率明显低于低收入组(P＜0.01),高收人组是男性性工作者的百分率明显低于中等收入组(P＜0.01).结论 MSM中不同经济状况人群具有某些不同的AIDS高危性行为,较好的经济状况并不能制约高危性行为,因此对不同的亚人群应制定和实施相应的AIDS干预措施.
목적 탐토중국남남성접촉자(MSM)중불동경제수입인군애자병고위성행위상황.방법 채용정향추양방법,대9개성시2250례MSM진행닉명문권조사,비교고、중、저경제수입인군적고위성행위발생상황.결과 고화중등수입조루계동성성반수(평균분별위110.17개화71.97개)、동성구교성반수(평균분별위62.45개화46.6개)、동성항교성반수(평균분별위52.21개화32.3개)균명현고우저수입조(P＜0.01),고수입조루계동성성반수、동성구교성반수급동성항교성반수균명현고우중등수입조(P＜0.05).고화중등수입조최근일차항교안전투사용솔(분별위79.03%화77.29%)명현고우저수입조(P＜0.01).고수입조최근일차여남성성공작자성교(3.81%)백분솔명현고우중등급저수입조(P＜0.01).고화중등수인조증경향남성"매"성(분별위24.27%화14.7%)적백분솔명현고우저수입조(P＜0.01),고수입조증경향남성"매"성적백분솔명현고우중등수입조(P＜0.01).고화중등수입조시남성성공작자(분별위6.72%화11.05%)적백분솔명현저우저수입조(P＜0.01),고수인조시남성성공작자적백분솔명현저우중등수입조(P＜0.01).결론 MSM중불동경제상황인군구유모사불동적AIDS고위성행위,교호적경제상황병불능제약고위성행위,인차대불동적아인군응제정화실시상응적AIDS간예조시.
Objective To evaluate the effects of socioeconomic status on the distribution of cardiovascular risk factors and clinicaltreatments of patients with acute myocardial infarction in Beijing.Methods In Beijing, a prospective, muhi-center, registration study was carried out which including 800 patients who were consecutively hospitalized for ST-segment elevation acute myocardial infarction within 24 hours after event attack in 19 different hospitals in Beijing between November, 2005 and December, 2006.Indicators of socioeconomic status included self-reported personal income (＜500, 500-2000,＞2000 RMB/month), educational attainment (≤ 12 and ＞ 12 years) and status of medical insurance (yes/no).According to categories of education, patients were categorized into two groups of lower socioeconomic status and higher socioeconomic status. Differences of cardiovascular risk factors and clinical treatments were compared across the two groups respectively. Results Proportion of diabetes and hyperlipidemia in patients with higher socioeconomic status was much higher than that of patients with lower socioeconomic status (P＜0.05, P＜0.01 respectively). Patients with lower socioeconomic status were more likely to be smokers (P ＜0.05). The rates of receiving coronary angiography and PTCA were much lower in patients with lower socioeconomic status. Medical insurance and income were the most important two socioeconomic factors determining the use of PTCA. Conclusion Compared to patients with lowersocioeconomic status,patients with higher socioeconomic status had higher rates of hyperlipidemia and diabetes but lower smoking rate among cardiovascular risk factors. The rates of receiving interventional therapies were much lower in patients with lower socioeconomic status.