首页 | 本学科首页   官方微博 | 高级检索  
     

北京市城市职业人群健康综合干预效果评价
引用本文:李洁,赵芳红,李英华,等. 北京市城市职业人群健康综合干预效果评价[J]. 中国健康教育, 2013, 0(12): 1059-1063
作者姓名:李洁  赵芳红  李英华  
作者单位:[1]北京市丰台区疾病预防控制中心,北京100071 [2]北京市疾病预防控制中心,北京100013 [3]中国健康教育中心,北京100011 [4]北京大学医学部公共卫生学院,北京100191 [5]中国疾病预防控制中心慢性非传染性疾病预防控制中心,北京100050
基金项目:国家高技术研究发展计划(863计划)(2008AA022403)
摘    要:
目的评价职业人群健康综合干预措施的效果,为开展职业人群健康干预提供参考。方法在北京市选取6家单位3类职业人群开展为期2年的健康干预,采用《中国城市居民健康状况自评量表》,研究职业人群健康干预的效果。结果干预前共调查944人,干预后共调查916人。与干预前比,干预后3个分量表的自评症状都有不同程度的改变。在生理健康分量表中,疲劳感(19.7%VS10.5%)、疲劳缓解(59.6%vs62.9%)、腰背痛(20.6%VS16.2%)、心慌气短(13.3%V89.4%)、脱发(22.1%vs16.9%)、胃肠不适(17.4%VS13.8%)、咽部不适(19.3%VS14.6%)、眼睛不适(24.7%VS15.7%)、性兴趣降低(13.8%VS9.5%)、抵抗力下降(7.0%VS4.8%)、嗅觉下降(7.3%vs5.6%)和皮肤黯淡(17.0%vs10.6%)等12项条目的自评症状显著优于干预前(P〈0.05);在心理健康分量表中,记忆力减退(21.0%VS12.3%)、感觉反应迟钝(11.0%VS7.7%)、做事犹豫不决(11.8%VS7.5%)、做事力不从心(8.7%V85.3%)等4项条目的自评症状显著优于干预前(P〈0.05);在社会适应分量表中,只有工作效率下降(8.4%V84.5%)1项条目的自评症状显著优于干预前(P〈0.05)。结论干预后生理健康状况明显提升,心理健康状况有所改善,但社会适应状况改变不明显。

关 键 词:职业人群  健康干预  措施  效果评价

The effects of comprehensive health intervention of the urban occupational population in Beijing
Affiliation:LI Jie, ZHAO Fang-hong, LI Ying-hua, SUN Si-wei, LIU Min, WAN Cuo-feng.( Fengtai District Center for Disease Control and Prevention of Belting City, Belting 100071, China)
Abstract:
Objective To evaluate the effects of comprehensive health intervention among the urdan occupational population in Beijing and to provide the scientific evidence for making related measure for these population. Methods 3 different occupational population (public servant, scientific and technical personnel, and enterprise personnel scientific and technological personnel scientific and technological personnel scientific and technological personnel scientific and technologi- cal personnel scientific and technological personnel scientific and technological personnel scientific and technological person- nel) in 12 work agencies were randomly selected in Beijing. Health interventions were carried out in 12 work agencies for 2 years. The method of comparison of the health status of the occupational population before and after the interventions was used to evaluate the effects of the interventions. Results All the 12 agencies carried out the interventions as planned, 944 people were investigated pre-interventions, 916 people after the interventions. Self-reported symptoms about three sub-scales had turned to be better. In the physiology scale, fatigue ( 19. 7% vs 10. 5% ), fatigue recovery (59.6% vs 62. 9% ), low back pain (20. 6% vs 16. 2% ), nervous breathing ( 13.3% vs 9.4% ), hair lose (22. 1% vs 16. 9% ), gastro-intestinal discomfort ( 17.4% vs 13.8% ), pharynx discomfort (19. 3% vs 14. 6% ), eye discomfort (24. 7% vs 15.7% ), sexual interest decline ( 13.8% vs 9.5% ), immunity decline (7. 0% vs 4. 8% ), sense of smell decline (7.3% vs 5.6% ) and dull skin ( 17.0% vs 10. 6% ) , total 12 items were improved after intervention (P 〈 0. 05 ). In mental health scale , memo- ry decline (21.0% vs 12. 3% ), sensation slow ( 11.0% vs 7.7% ), hesitation (11.8% vs 7.5% ) and ability inadequa- cy (8.7% vs 5.3% ), total 4 items were better than before (P 〈0. 05). Only one item with work efficiency low (8.4% vs 4. 5% ) of social adaptation was improved after intervention ( P 〈 0. 05 ). Conclusion The physiology health level and mental health level of the occupational population improved significantly, while the social adaptation changed a little.
Keywords:Occupational population  Health intervention  Measure  Effect evaluation
本文献已被 CNKI 维普 等数据库收录!
设为首页 | 免责声明 | 关于勤云 | 加入收藏

Copyright©北京勤云科技发展有限公司  京ICP备09084417号