CAJ | 학술논문

目的：通过对医护人员进行安全注射综合性实验性干预，观察干预后的近期、远期效果，为改善不安全注射现状提供切实可行的措施。方法：对湖南省县级医院、乡镇医院进行抽样，随机分为实验组和对照组，对实验组进行知识讲座、发放安全注射指南、宣传册以及现场指导等综合干预措施，并分别在干预后1个月和6个月对2组进行问卷调查，比较2组不安全注射行为率及安全注射行为的效果。结果：干预后1个月，实验组不安全注射行为率由干预前的27.8%下降到21.7%，而对照组的不安全注射行为率反而由26.0%上升到了27.9%，干预后2组比较差异具有统计学意义(P<0.01)；干预后6个月，再次对医护人员进行调查发现，实验组医护人员的不安全注射率继续下降到了18.4%，未接受干预的对照组医护人员的不安全注射行为率也下降到了22.4%，但干预后两组比较差异仍具有统计学意义(P<0.01)。而实验组和对照组在不同干预时间点不安全注射行为率都逐渐降低，差异均有统计学意义(P<0.01)。实验组在干预后1个月和6个月的安全注射行为得分均高于对照组(P<0.01)；实验组自身干预后比干预前的行为得分高(P<0.01)。结论：安全注射知识与技能的培训、发放安全注射指南与注射现场的实践指导相结合的综合干预模式对于改变基层医护人员不安全注射的行为效果显著，值得推广。
목적：통과대의호인원진행안전주사종합성실험성간예，관찰간예후적근기、원기효과，위개선불안전주사현상제공절실가행적조시。방법：대호남성현급의원、향진의원진행추양，수궤분위실험조화대조조，대실험조진행지식강좌、발방안전주사지남、선전책이급현장지도등종합간예조시，병분별재간예후1개월화6개월대2조진행문권조사，비교2조불안전주사행위솔급안전주사행위적효과。결과：간예후1개월，실험조불안전주사행위솔유간예전적27.8%하강도21.7%，이대조조적불안전주사행위솔반이유26.0%상승도료27.9%，간예후2조비교차이구유통계학의의(P<0.01)；간예후6개월，재차대의호인원진행조사발현，실험조의호인원적불안전주사솔계속하강도료18.4%，미접수간예적대조조의호인원적불안전주사행위솔야하강도료22.4%，단간예후량조비교차이잉구유통계학의의(P<0.01)。이실험조화대조조재불동간예시간점불안전주사행위솔도축점강저，차이균유통계학의의(P<0.01)。실험조재간예후1개월화6개월적안전주사행위득분균고우대조조(P<0.01)；실험조자신간예후비간예전적행위득분고(P<0.01)。결론：안전주사지식여기능적배훈、발방안전주사지남여주사현장적실천지도상결합적종합간예모식대우개변기층의호인원불안전주사적행위효과현저，치득추엄。
Objective:To experimentally intervene safe injection by medical staff in basic-level hospitals and observe the recent and long-term effect atfer the intervention and to provide practical measures to improve safe injection. Methods:We used random sampling methods to set up groups in county hospitals and township hospitals of Hunan Province, and offered lectures, delivered safe injection guide, brochure and on-site guidance in the experimental group. We surveyed the 2 groups atfer the intervention at 1 month and 6 months to compare the effect of unsafe injection behaviors and safe injection behaviors. Results:One month after the intervention, the unsafe injection rate in the experimental group decreased from 27.8%to 21.7%, while in the control group injection the unsafe injection rate rose from 26.0%to 27.9%, with signiifcant difference (P<0.01). Six months atfer the intervention, the unsafe injection rate in the experimental group declined to 18.4%while the unsafe injection rate in the control group also dropped to 22.4%, with signiifcant difference (P<0.01). Unsafe injection rate was decreased in the experimental group at different intervention points, with signiifcant difference (P<0.01). The safe injection behavior scores in the experimental group were higher than those in the control group after the intervention of 1 month and 6 month intervention (P<0.01);the experimental group got higher scores atfer the intervention (P<0.01). Conclusion:Training of safe injection, distribution of safe injection guide, and comprehensive intervention model can significantly change the primary care practitioners’ behaviors in unsafe injections and it is worth promoting.