3.
多因素Logistic分析及亚组分析结果
Multivariate Logistic analysis and subgroup analysis
| Group | Total data analysis* | Stratified analysis** | P | |||
| RR | 95% CI | RR | 95% CI | |||
| *Although the interaction result was not significantly different（P=0.305）in total data analysis, the advantage of urgent group in diagnosis is more obvious than elective group with the improvement of cleanliness. **We considered that the interaction was underpowered to detect a difference. | ||||||
| Urgent vs. Elective | ||||||
| Cleanliness-good | 3.195 | 1.047-9.750 | 4.597 | 1.158-18.254 | 0.030 | |
| Cleanliness-moderate | 1.133 | 0.325-3.945 | 1.967 | 0.406-9.536 | 0.401 | |
| Cleanliness-poor | 0.986 | 0.280-3.475 | 1.536 | 0.366-6.450 | 0.556 | |
| Good vs. poor | ||||||
| Urgent group | 4.350 | 1.576-12.001 | 3.491 | 1.274-9.569 | 0.015 | |
| Elective group | 1.342 | 0.360-4.996 | 1.248 | 0.235-6.629 | 0.795 | |
| Moderate vs. poor | ||||||
| Urgent group | 1.291 | 0.474-3.520 | 1.144 | 0.412-3.177 | 0.797 | |
| Elective group | 1.123 | 0.271-4.651 | 1.095 | 0.211-5.680 | 0.914 | |
| Good vs. moderate | ||||||
| Urgent group | 3.369 | 1.039-10.914 | 3.053 | 0.992-10.112 | 0.068 | |
| Elective group | 1.194 | 0.360-4.996 | 1.140 | 0.219-5.922 | 0.876 | |