抗击新型冠状病毒肺炎一线护理人员防护暴露风险事件调查

目的: 调查抗击新型冠状病毒肺炎(corona virus disease 2019,COVID-19)一线护士防护暴露风险事件现状,为管理者做好护理人员防护提供依据。方法: 便利选取支援武汉的308名护理人员,采用研究团队自行编制的网络问卷进行调查,通过事件回顾的方式对护理人员在防护状态下的7种防护暴露风险事件进行调查。结果: 共有304人填写了有效问卷,88.8%的护理人员接受了防护暴露风险事件预防与应对的培训。7种防护暴露风险事件中,鞋套污染、脱落的发生率相对较高,为53.6%;由于有手套的保护,手部或皮肤污染发生率相对较低,为14.1%;护士心理负担最重的防护暴露风险事件是N95口罩污染、脱落或移位,分值达8.2±2.3。单因素分析发现,支援武汉天数不同,防护风险事件发生的种类数量不同(χ²=14.562,P=0.024);多元有序Logistic回归发现,男性是防护暴露风险事件发生的种类数量的独立保护因素(P=0.019)。结论: 支援武汉的一线护理人员工作中会出现防护暴露风险事件,在工作中既要指导护士防止风险事件的发生,又要指导其有效应对,从而减轻心理负担。

Investigation of protective exposure risk events in nurses against corona virus disease 2019 in Wuhan

Objective: To investigate the current situation of virus exposure risk incidents of nurses against corona virus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in Wuhan, and to provide reference evidence for nursing managers to protect nursing staff who were working in the isolation ward. Methods: In the study, 308 nursing staff against COVID-19 working in the isolation ward in Wuhan were conveniently selected to participate in the investigation. The designed questionnaires including 7 kinds of protective exposure risk events were made by the team of researchers on the basis of literature review and interview with the nurses in Wuhan. All the participants recalled their working experience in the status of dressing in personal protective equipment and filled in the questionnaires online by WeChat according to the same instruction. Results: The questionnaires were filled in validly by a total of 304 nursing staff, of whom 88.8% received emergency training on the prevention and dealing measurement of exposure risk events. The incidence of shoe cover contamination, falling off or torn was relatively high, about 53.6%. Due to the protection of gloves, the incidence of hand or skin contamination was relatively low, about 14.1%. The most nervousness of protective exposure risk event for nurses was N95 mask contamination, falling off or shifting, with a score of 8.2±2.3, showing a higher psychiatric burden. Single factor analysis found that the number of days in Wuhan was different, the number of the types of protective risk events occurred was different (χ²=14.562, P=0.024), orderly multivariate Logistic regression found that men were the independent protective factor for the number of the types of protective exposure risk events that occurred (P=0.019). Conclusion: Protective exposure risk events may occur in the work of nursing staff working in the isolation ward in Wuhan. It is necessary to guide nurses to prevent the occurrence of protective exposure risk events and effectively deal with them, so as to prevent virus exposure and reduce psycholo-gical burden.