论文部分内容阅读
目的:分析比较两种诊断标准下职业性慢性苯中毒的发病特征。方法:于2020年3月，回顾性分析2009年1月至2019年12月烟台市烟台山医院诊断的126例职业性慢性苯中毒患者资料，分为旧标准组（74例）和新标准组（52例）。分析两组患者性别、发病年龄、接苯工龄、行业分布、工种、作业环境苯浓度及诊断分级的差异，并对旧标准下22例苯中毒观察对象随访情况进行回顾性分析。结果:旧标准组和新标准组患者性别、发病年龄、接苯工龄、行业分布和工种构成比较，差异均无统计学意义（n P>0.05）；旧标准组和新标准组中各有41.9%（31/74）和17.3%（9/52）患者作业场所苯浓度超过最高容许浓度，两组患者作业场所不同苯浓度构成比较，差异有统计学意义（n P<0.05）。旧标准组患者以轻度中毒（79.7%，59/74）为主，而新标准组以中重度中毒（51.9%，27/52）为主，两组患者诊断分级构成比较，差异有统计学意义（n P0.05) . In the old criteria group and the new criteria group, 41.9% (31/74) and 17.3% (9/52) of the patients' workplace benzene concentration exceeded the maximum allowable concentration, respectively. The composition of different benzene concentration in the workplace between the two groups showed statistically significant (n P<0.05) . In the old criteria group, the proportion of mild poisoning (79.7%, 59/74) was the majority, while in the new criteria group, the proportion of moderate and severe poisoning (51.9%, 27/52) were the majority, and there was statistically significance in the composition ratio of diagnostic grade between the two groups (n P<0.05) . Under the old criteria, after folow-up of 22 cases of benzene poisoning observation subjects, we observed that 8 cases (36.4%) progressed to the level of chronic benzene poisoning.n Conclusion:The revision of diagnostic criteria for benzene poisoning may affect the composition of diagnosis classification. Based on the rights and interests of workers, formulating more complete diagnostic criteria and system policies will be more conducive to the development of occupational benzene poisoning prevention and control.