成都市医务人员吸烟状况及控烟干预研究

目的 了解成都市医务人员的吸烟状况及其控烟态度和行为,并对其进行干预及其效果评价。方法 采用问卷形式对成都市3家医院的932名医务人员的吸烟危害知识、控烟态度和行为进行调查,并对一家医院进行干预,同时对干预结果进行评价。结果 男性吸烟率为49．7％,女性为0．2％,男性吸烟者主要集中在外科医生和医技人员中;知识方面,对吸烟与肺癌、缺血性心脏病的关系掌握较好,但对被动吸烟与儿童中耳炎和猝死综合症关系回答正确的仅41．5％和48．2％;86．2％的不吸烟者中反对“被动吸烟无害”,但吸烟者中仅为70．4％,两者的差异有统计学意义;态度方面,对于以经济手段来处罚违反吸烟规定者,不吸烟者和吸烟者赞成的比例分别是87．5％和68．1％,差异有统计学意义（P＜0．001）;行为方面,不吸烟者询问病人吸烟状况的比例高于吸烟者,同时不吸烟者鼓励家人或朋友戒烟的比例明显高于吸烟者,二者差异有统计学意义。通过综合干预,医务人员的吸烟率差异虽无统计学意义,但有好转趋势;控烟态度明显好于干预前,差异有统计学意义（P＜0．05）。结论 目前医务人员的吸烟率较高,控烟意识淡漠,吸烟者和不吸烟者在控烟态度和行为方面存在差异。在医院环境中采取综合干预的方法可以改变医务人员的吸烟行为,提高其控烟意识。

Investigation on Smoking Status of Medical Professionals in Chengdu City and on Intervention for Tobacco Control

OBJECTIVE: To illuminate the current smoking status of medical professionals, understand their knowledge, attitude and practice about tobacco control, then apply a comprehensive model to intervention, and finally evaluate the effectiveness. METHODS: 932 medical professionals from 3 hospitals were surveyed with questionnaire on their smoking status, knowledge, attitude and practice about tobacco control. One of the hospitals was taken as intervention group, the others served as control. RESULTS: The smoking rate in male was 49.7%, and in female 0.2%; male smokers were mostly surgeons and medical technicians. As to knowledge, most of medical professionals knew the relationship between lung cancer, heart disease and smoking, but less than 50% knew the relationship between childhood tympanitis, sudden infant death syndrome and passive smoking. As to attitude, 86.2% non-smokers opposed "passive smoking was harmless", but only 70.4% smokers opposed so; the difference between them was significant; 87.5% non-smokers agreed to take economic measure to punish the smokers who violate tobacco control regulations, but only 68.1% smokers agreed so. As to practice, both smokers and non-smokers rarely asked about patient's smoking status, but non-smokers were more willing to persuade their family or friends to quit smoking than smokers; the difference was statistically significant. Through the comprehensive intervention, the smoking rate for these medical professionals declined from 48.6% to 42.7%, but the difference was not significant; more medical professionals were against "passive smoking is harmless" after the intervention (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Medical professionals have a comparatively high smoking rate, they are indifferent to tobacco control. These smokers have different attitude and behaviors to tobacco control. The comprehensive tobacco control is effective for changing the medical professionals' smoking behavior and enhancing their consciousness.