不同浓度碘盐对人群碘营养状况影响的现场试验研究

目的观察不同浓度碘盐对人群碘营养状况影响,寻找适合当地居民食用的盐碘浓度。方法采用流行病学的现场群组干预试验研究方法,对南昌市399户城乡居民共1099人,随机分配4个组,分别提供含碘浓度为(6±2)mg/kg、(15±2)mg/kg、(24±2)mg/kg、(34±2)mg/kg的碘盐,并将其家中原有的碘盐换回。采用单盲法进行31天的干预试验。采集受试者干预前及干预后第27- 31天的一次随机尿样检测尿碘浓度,并进行膳食调查,同时采集干预前受试者实际食用碘盐检测碘含量;采集当地水源水样8份,检测水碘含量。结果当地水碘含量中位数3.05μg/L,干预前盐碘浓度为(36.4±5.4)mg/kg,碘盐合格率98.8%;干预前城区居民尿碘中位数为293.6 μg/L,农村居民尿碘中位数为508.8 μg/L。干预后第27、28、29、30、31天各组人群尿碘中位数不同日期之间的差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。干预后第28天4个干预组的尿碘中位数:城区分别为97.2、198.6、249.4和330.7μg/L,农村分别为100.5、193.0、246.3和308.3 μg/L。结论当地属于缺碘地区,居民普遍食用合格碘盐,尿碘水平偏高;适宜当地居民食用的碘盐含碘浓度为15-25 mg/kg。

A field trial study on the influence of different salt iodine concentration on urinary iodine excrition among the target population

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the influence of different salt iodine concentration on urinary iodine excrition among the target population and to determine the appropriate level of salt iodization to the local people. METHODS: In the 31-day random control trial, 1099 subjects from 399 families were randomly distributed into four groups and were supplied with iodized-salt with different iodine concentration of (6 +/- 2)mg/kg, (15 +/- 2)mg/kg, (24 +/- 2)mg/kg and (34 +/- 2)mg/kg, respectively. The original family salt was retrieved, whose iodine content was determined in those subjects' families with single-blind method. Baseline survey was conducted including salt and urinary iodine of the subjects. From the 27th day after the intervention, the urinary samples of the subjects were continuously collected for 5 days and urinary iodine was tesed respectively. Meanwhile, daily meal investigation was conducted to evaluate the influences originated from food. RESULTS: The median of local water iodine content was 3.05 microg/L and the average salt iodine concentration was (36.4 +/- 5.4)mg/kg while 98.8% of the household consumed sufficient iodized-salt. The medians of baseline urinary iodine of the subjects were 293.6 microg/L in city, and 508.8 microg/L in the countryside. The urinary iodine medians of four groups in the day of 28th after intervention were 97.2 microg/L, 198.6 microg/L, 249.4 microg/L, and 330.7 microg/L respectively in the city group, while they were 100.5 microg/L, 193.0 microg/L, 246.3 microg/L and 308.3 microg/L seperately in the countryside group. There was no statistically significant differences among the medians of urine iodine in the 27th, 28th, 29th, 30th and 31st day after intervention (P > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The target areas were with iodine deficiency which possessed high coverage of qualified iodized-salt at household level. The average urinary iodine level of the subjects was slightly higher than the standard level, according to the baseline survey. The intervetion trail showed that the salt iodine concentration of 15-24 mg/kg was sufficient to the local people.