背景:生存质量作为一种较全面体现新的健康观和医学模式的评价体系引入职业伤害领域,是对传统的治疗与康复效果评价方法的补充.目的:分析安徽铜陵地区矿山职业伤害者生存质量现状及其影响因素.设计:病例对照问卷调查,Logistic单因素分析和多因素分析.单位:铜陵有色职工总医院、铜陵有色公司矿山安全科.对象:选择2000-01/2005-12安徽铜陵有色金属(集团)公司下属4个矿山234例职业伤害者为工伤组,伤害等级均经该企业安全生产部门鉴定认可;选取本单位(部门)同性别206名等情况相似职工为对照组,所有受试对象均对检测项目知情同意.方法:问卷调查在2006-12完成,调查方法采用问卷调查法,由调查对象本人填写,对小学及以下文化程度或病情严重者,由他人通过询问其本人情况和感受而代为填写.①对两组人群社会人口学特征进行调查.②采用信度、效度及敏感度均较好的世界卫生组织生存质量-100量表作为主要调查工具,调查内容包括:影响因素调查(性别、年龄、职业、学历、婚姻、吸烟、饮酒、工资、工种、伤害等级、受伤部位、类型、患其它疾病、家庭人均收入、人均住房面积、事故类型、性格类型、睡眠状况等);反映生存质量不同维度调查:分别是生理机能领域(躯体疼痛、精力、睡眠),心理状态领域(幸福感、信心等5个方面),独立性领域(日常生活能力、工作能力等4个方面),社会关系领域(人际关系、社会交往等3个方面),物质生活环境领域(安全性、住房环境等8个方面),信仰领域(个人信仰),共计24个方面,每个方面有4个条目,再加上总体健康方面的4个条目,总计100个条目.每个条目采用线性评分法,最高5分、最低1分,生存质量自评总分条目1个,按百分制打分.③对工伤组受试对象生存质量一般情况进行单因素分析,以生存质量(6个领域)不同维度的指标得分作为因变量,以各影响因素自变量作多元逐步回归分析.主要观察指标:①两组人群社会人口学特征.②两组受试对象生存质量不同维度指标得分.③工伤组患者生存质量一般情况与影响因素的关系.结果:纳入工伤组患者234例与对照组206名均进入结果分析.①两组受试对象在性别、年龄、职业、学历、工作岗位、婚姻状况、饮酒、吸烟、工资、患其它疾病、就业类型方面人群社会人口学特征差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05).②工伤组受试对象生理领域、独立性领域及总生存质量得分低于对照组(P＜0.05).③影响工伤组受试对象生存质量的因素有是否为中毒和窒息事故,是否伤及踝及脚、颅脑,是否发生撕脱伤以及工作任务轻重;多因素分析提示,腰部伤、工资水平、与同事及家人关系影响工伤组受试对象生存质量.结论:安徽铜陵地区矿山工伤者生存质量较未发生工伤者低,影响的因素是多方面的,但以受伤部位、事故及受伤类型、工作经济状况、社会家庭关系为主.
揹景:生存質量作為一種較全麵體現新的健康觀和醫學模式的評價體繫引入職業傷害領域,是對傳統的治療與康複效果評價方法的補充.目的:分析安徽銅陵地區礦山職業傷害者生存質量現狀及其影響因素.設計:病例對照問捲調查,Logistic單因素分析和多因素分析.單位:銅陵有色職工總醫院、銅陵有色公司礦山安全科.對象:選擇2000-01/2005-12安徽銅陵有色金屬(集糰)公司下屬4箇礦山234例職業傷害者為工傷組,傷害等級均經該企業安全生產部門鑒定認可;選取本單位(部門)同性彆206名等情況相似職工為對照組,所有受試對象均對檢測項目知情同意.方法:問捲調查在2006-12完成,調查方法採用問捲調查法,由調查對象本人填寫,對小學及以下文化程度或病情嚴重者,由他人通過詢問其本人情況和感受而代為填寫.①對兩組人群社會人口學特徵進行調查.②採用信度、效度及敏感度均較好的世界衛生組織生存質量-100量錶作為主要調查工具,調查內容包括:影響因素調查(性彆、年齡、職業、學歷、婚姻、吸煙、飲酒、工資、工種、傷害等級、受傷部位、類型、患其它疾病、傢庭人均收入、人均住房麵積、事故類型、性格類型、睡眠狀況等);反映生存質量不同維度調查:分彆是生理機能領域(軀體疼痛、精力、睡眠),心理狀態領域(倖福感、信心等5箇方麵),獨立性領域(日常生活能力、工作能力等4箇方麵),社會關繫領域(人際關繫、社會交往等3箇方麵),物質生活環境領域(安全性、住房環境等8箇方麵),信仰領域(箇人信仰),共計24箇方麵,每箇方麵有4箇條目,再加上總體健康方麵的4箇條目,總計100箇條目.每箇條目採用線性評分法,最高5分、最低1分,生存質量自評總分條目1箇,按百分製打分.③對工傷組受試對象生存質量一般情況進行單因素分析,以生存質量(6箇領域)不同維度的指標得分作為因變量,以各影響因素自變量作多元逐步迴歸分析.主要觀察指標:①兩組人群社會人口學特徵.②兩組受試對象生存質量不同維度指標得分.③工傷組患者生存質量一般情況與影響因素的關繫.結果:納入工傷組患者234例與對照組206名均進入結果分析.①兩組受試對象在性彆、年齡、職業、學歷、工作崗位、婚姻狀況、飲酒、吸煙、工資、患其它疾病、就業類型方麵人群社會人口學特徵差異無統計學意義(P＞0.05).②工傷組受試對象生理領域、獨立性領域及總生存質量得分低于對照組(P＜0.05).③影響工傷組受試對象生存質量的因素有是否為中毒和窒息事故,是否傷及踝及腳、顱腦,是否髮生撕脫傷以及工作任務輕重;多因素分析提示,腰部傷、工資水平、與同事及傢人關繫影響工傷組受試對象生存質量.結論:安徽銅陵地區礦山工傷者生存質量較未髮生工傷者低,影響的因素是多方麵的,但以受傷部位、事故及受傷類型、工作經濟狀況、社會傢庭關繫為主.
배경:생존질량작위일충교전면체현신적건강관화의학모식적평개체계인입직업상해영역,시대전통적치료여강복효과평개방법적보충.목적:분석안휘동릉지구광산직업상해자생존질량현상급기영향인소.설계:병례대조문권조사,Logistic단인소분석화다인소분석.단위:동릉유색직공총의원、동릉유색공사광산안전과.대상:선택2000-01/2005-12안휘동릉유색금속(집단)공사하속4개광산234례직업상해자위공상조,상해등급균경해기업안전생산부문감정인가;선취본단위(부문)동성별206명등정황상사직공위대조조,소유수시대상균대검측항목지정동의.방법:문권조사재2006-12완성,조사방법채용문권조사법,유조사대상본인전사,대소학급이하문화정도혹병정엄중자,유타인통과순문기본인정황화감수이대위전사.①대량조인군사회인구학특정진행조사.②채용신도、효도급민감도균교호적세계위생조직생존질량-100량표작위주요조사공구,조사내용포괄:영향인소조사(성별、년령、직업、학력、혼인、흡연、음주、공자、공충、상해등급、수상부위、류형、환기타질병、가정인균수입、인균주방면적、사고류형、성격류형、수면상황등);반영생존질량불동유도조사:분별시생리궤능영역(구체동통、정력、수면),심리상태영역(행복감、신심등5개방면),독립성영역(일상생활능력、공작능력등4개방면),사회관계영역(인제관계、사회교왕등3개방면),물질생활배경영역(안전성、주방배경등8개방면),신앙영역(개인신앙),공계24개방면,매개방면유4개조목,재가상총체건강방면적4개조목,총계100개조목.매개조목채용선성평분법,최고5분、최저1분,생존질량자평총분조목1개,안백분제타분.③대공상조수시대상생존질량일반정황진행단인소분석,이생존질량(6개영역)불동유도적지표득분작위인변량,이각영향인소자변량작다원축보회귀분석.주요관찰지표:①량조인군사회인구학특정.②량조수시대상생존질량불동유도지표득분.③공상조환자생존질량일반정황여영향인소적관계.결과:납입공상조환자234례여대조조206명균진입결과분석.①량조수시대상재성별、년령、직업、학력、공작강위、혼인상황、음주、흡연、공자、환기타질병、취업류형방면인군사회인구학특정차이무통계학의의(P＞0.05).②공상조수시대상생리영역、독립성영역급총생존질량득분저우대조조(P＜0.05).③영향공상조수시대상생존질량적인소유시부위중독화질식사고,시부상급과급각、로뇌,시부발생시탈상이급공작임무경중;다인소분석제시,요부상、공자수평、여동사급가인관계영향공상조수시대상생존질량.결론:안휘동릉지구광산공상자생존질량교미발생공상자저,영향적인소시다방면적,단이수상부위、사고급수상류형、공작경제상황、사회가정관계위주.
BACKGROUND: Quality of life, which is induced as a completely evaluating system to reflect new healthy viewpoints and medical patterns, plays a key role in supplying traditional therapy and evaluating rehabilitation efficacy in occupational injury.OBJECTIVE : To analyze the effects of occupational injury on quality of life in mining area of Tongling, Anhui.DESIGN: Case contrast questionnaire, Logistic single factor analysis and multiple factors analysis.SETTING: Workers General Hospital of Tongling Nonferrous Metal Group; Mining Safety Office of Tongling Nonferrous Metal Company.PARTICIPANTS: A total of 234 subjects with occupational injury were selected from four subgroups of Tongling Nonferrous Metal Company from January 2000 to December 2005 and regarded as the occupational injury group.Injured grade was evaluated by the department of safety in production. In addition, 206 employees of the same sex were regarded as the control group. All subjects provided the confirmed consent.METHODS: Questionnaires were finished in December 2006. Besides those whose educational level was lower than primary school or illness state was severe, their questionnaires were filled by somebody else through asking the feelings,and other subjects filled in the questionnaires by themselves. ① Social demography characteristics were surveyed in the two populations. ② The World Health Organization Quality of Life Assessment-100 (WHOQOL-100), which was characterized by excellent reliability, validity and sensitivity, was used to survey influencing factors (sex, age, occupation,educational level, marriage, smoking, drinking, pay, type of work in production, grade of occupational injury, injured site and type, other diseases, average income of per family member, housing area of per family member, accidental types,character styles, sleeping status, etc.) and various dimensions reflecting quality of life [physiological function (body ache,vigor, sleeping), mental state (well-being feels, confidence, and other three aspects), independence (daily living ability,work ability, and other two aspects), social relationship (interpersonal relation, social communication, and other one spect), material life (reliability, housing environment, and other eight aspects) and faith (individual faith)]. There were 24 aspects and every aspect included four items; in addition, there were 4 items in general healthy status. Therefore, there were 100 items in total. LinearitY method was used to score each item (from 1 tc 5 points). Self-scored quality of life had only one item, which was scored based on hundred-mark system. ③ Quality of life of subjects in the occupational injury group was analyzed with one-way analysis of variance. Variously dimensional indexes of quality of life in 6 fields were regarded as dependent variance, and effect factors were regarded as independent variance. The data were analyzed with multiple stepwise regression analysis.MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: ① Characteristics of social demography; ② scores of variously dimensional indexes of quality of life; ③ correlation between quality of life and effect factors in occupational injury group.RESULTS: All 234 patients in the occupational injury group and 206 subjects in the control group were involved in the final analysis. ① There were no significant differences in sex, age, occupation, educational degree, working duty,marriage, drinking, smoking, pay, having other diseases and occupational types between the two groups (P ＞ 0.05). ②Scores of physiological field, independence field and total quality of life were lower in the occupational injury group than those in the control group (P ＜ 0.05). ③ Effect factors on quality of life in the occupational injury group contained intoxication and asphyxia; ankle, foot and cranial injuries; avulsed wound and task degrees. Multiple factor analysis demonstrated that quality of life of patients in the occupational injury group was affected by waist injury, pay level and relationship with colleagues and family member.CONCLUSION: Quality of life is inferior in the occupational injury group to that in the control group. The effect factors are mainly focus on injured sites, accident and injured types, economic status and relationship with society and family member.
