| 刘倩筠 谭美珍 董海鹏 王静 陈展曦.婴幼儿生长情况家长评价误区与临床分类干预对策[J].现代生物医学进展英文版,2015,15(29):5724-5727. |
| 婴幼儿生长情况家长评价误区与临床分类干预对策 |
| Parental Misunderstanding in Infant Growth Assessmentsand Interventions by Clinical Classification |
| |
| DOI： |
| 中文关键词: 生长评价 生长速率 婴幼儿 身长 体重 |
| 英文关键词: Growth assessment Growth velocity Infant Height Weight |
| 基金项目:广东省人口计生委科技项目（20133097）；广州市医药卫生科技项目（20131A011063） |
|
| Hits: 837 |
| Download times: 0 |
| 中文摘要: |
| 目的：调查临床与家长对婴幼儿生长评价的差异，探讨婴幼儿生长情况临床分类干预对策和家庭养育指导方法。方法：对
307 例1-37 月龄婴幼儿进行生长监测和体格测量，根据生长水平、生长速率和匀称度进行临床综合评价，并与家长评价对比，分
析评价的差异和规律。结果：临床综合评价良好215 例(70.03%)，近期正常42 例(13.68%)，不良23 例(7.49%)，近期不足27 例
(8.80%)；家长评价“良好”155 例(50.49%)，“不良”92 例(29.97%)，“不知道”60 例(19.54%)；临床综合评价不良组与家长评价一致性
最高，占82.61%，其次为临床综合评价良好组，占62.33%；家长评价不一致者最常见于临床评价近期正常组(47.62%)，其次为临床
评价近期不足组(25.93%)，家长与临床评价差异有非常显著统计学意义(P<0.001)。结论：临床与家庭对婴幼儿体格生长评价存在
差异，家长往往低估孩子的生长水平，且忽视婴幼儿的生长速率指标，医生应在临床诊断的基础上对婴幼儿的生长情况进行临床
分类干预，指导家长客观评价孩子的生长情况，尽量做到科学育儿。 |
| 英文摘要: |
| Objective:To explore countermeasures by clinical classification and ways in parental raising by investigating the
differences in infant growth assessments from the clinical versus parental evaluation methods.Methods:A clinical analysis was
conducted on 307 cases of infants between 1 to 37 months old by monitoring their anthropometric growth. Overall assessments were
made based on the growth level, growth velocity, and the proportion of body. Then the clinical results with those from the parental
perspectives were compared and the differences and patterns were analyzed.Results:Using the clinical evaluation approach, 215 cases
(70.03%) were Good, 42 cases (13.68%) were The recent normal, 23 cases (7.49%) were Poor and the remaining 27 cases (8.8%) were
The recent insufficient. According to the parental evaluation, 155 cases (50.49%) were Good, 92 cases (29.97%) were Poor and the
remaining 60 cases (19.54%) were Unaware. Between the two evaluation methods, the highest consistency was found in the Poor group
(82.61%), followed by the Good group (62.33%). On the other hand, the highest inconsistency was from The recent normal group
(47.62%), followed by The recent insufficient group (25.93%). The difference between the clinical and parental evaluation was
statistically significant (x2＝30.698, P<0.001).Conclusion:Clinical and parental evaluations in infant growths are statistically different.
Parents usually underestimate infants' growth levels and they tend to neglect the growth velocity. Doctors should intervene by clinical
classification in the growth of infant on the basis of Clinical diagnosis and direct parents on how to objectively measure infants’growing
status and raise themin a scientific way. |
|
View Full Text
View/Add Comment Download reader |
| Close |
