目的 通过对WS/T 208—2011《氟斑牙诊断》的追踪评价,掌握标准应用情况,为进一步完善和修订标准提供依据。方法 按WS/T 536—2017《卫生标准跟踪评价指南》要求设计调查表,对省、市、县三级标准使用人员关于标准的宣贯、认知、应用状况、建议和意见进行调查。结果 共调查16个省标准使用人员587名,85.95%(497/585)的受访者通过行业培训知晓WS/T 536—2017《卫生标准跟踪评价指南》。认为能理解“氟斑牙诊断”“氟斑牙分度”“氟斑牙的检查方法”和“氟斑牙鉴别诊断”的受访者分别占94.86%(554/584)、89.74%(525/585)、94.66%(549/580)和89.35%(520/582)。标准正文内容的相关客观题正确率偏低,各知识点正确率均未超过40%。标准应用感受方面,64.53%的受访者认为“可疑”和“极轻”分度难以区分。结论 要继续加强标准宣贯,建议对“可疑”和“极轻”分度进行调整,以加强各分度间区分度。

Objective Through tracking evaluation of WS/T 208-2011 Diagnosis of dental fluorosis,to grasp the application situation of the standard,and to provide basis for further improvement and revision of the standard. Methods According to the requirements of WS/T 536-2017 Guidelines for health standard tracking evaluation,a survey form was created to investigate the promotion,understanding,application,and suggestions and opinions on the standard from personnel using this standard at the provincial,municipal,and county levels. Results A total of 587 standard users from 16 provinces were surveyed.85.95% (497/585) of the respondents were aware of WS/T 536-2017 Guidelines for health standard tracking evaluation through industry training.The percentages of those who believed they understood "Fluorosis Diagnosis""Fluorosis Severity Classification""Examination Methods for Fluorosis" and "Differential Diagnosis of Fluorosis" were 94.86% (554/584),89.74% (525/585),94.66% (549/580),and 89.35% (520/582),respectively.The correct rate for objective questions related to the content of the standard was low,and the correct rates for each knowledge point did not exceed 40%.Regarding the application of the standard,64.53% of the respondents found it difficult to distinguish between the "suspicious" and "very mild" severity classifications. Conclusion This standard needs to continue to strengthen promotion.It is recommended to adjusting the "suspicious" and "very mild" severity classifications when revising the standard in order to strengthen the distinction between each severity classification.