2017年武汉市公共场所双随机抽检卫生检测结果分析
|
摘要
目的了解武汉市公共场所卫生基本状况,预防危害武汉市民健康事件的发生,确保公共场所的公共卫生安全。方法用双随机的方法对武汉市公共场所进行抽检,抽出68家住宿、美容美发、文化娱乐3种类型的公共场所,根据《公共场所卫生检验方法第6部分:卫生监测技术规范》等相关国家标准对这些公共场所的室内空气和公共用品用具进行检测并评价。结果抽检68家公共场所820件用品用具,738件合格,合格率为90.00%,不同类型公共场所合格率差异有统计学意义(χ2=7.345,P <0.05);室内空气的检测项目中住宿场所的合格率最低,为87.76%;住宿场所的细菌总数合格率最低,为58.52%,其次是美容美发场所,大肠杆菌的合格率为85.14%,且住宿场所、美容美发场所中不同微生物间合格率差异均有统计学意义(χ2=121.448,P <0.01;χ2=11.563,P <0.01)。住宿场所中卫生洁具类公共用品用具的合格率最低,为78.35%,差异有统计学意义(χ2=23.593,P <0.01);其次是美容美发场所理发用品用具,合格率为90.00%,差异无统计学意义。城区室内空气的合格率略低,为95.00%;公共用品用具合格率较远城区低,为68.25%,且城区与远城区室内空气及公共用品用具的合格率差异均无统计学意义。结论本次双随机抽检合格率较高,武汉市大部分公共场所卫生状况良好,说明创建卫生城市有一定成效。卫生监督部门应加强对小旅店的卫生宣传,有关部门应对洗涤消毒公司进行监管。
Objective To understand the basic sanitation status of public places in Wuhan,prevent the occurrence of health incidents in Wuhan,and to ensure the public health and safety in public places.Methods Public places in Wuhan were sampled by a double random method,and 68 public places were sampled including the kind of accommodation,beauty salons,culture and entertainment.The indoor air and public goods appliances in these public places were tested and evaluated according to the relevant national standards "Public Health Inspection Methods for Public Places Part 6:Health Monitoring Technical Specifications".Results A total of 820 pieces of supplies were sampled in 68 public places,among which 738 pieces were qualified,and the pass rate was 90.00%.The difference of qualified rate in different types of public places was statistically significant(χ~2=7.345,P < 0.05).The indoor air testing had the lowest qualified rate of 87.76%;the lowest qualified rate of bacteria in the residential area was 58.52%,followed by the beauty salon,and the pass rate of Escherichia coli was 85.14%.There was a statistically significant difference in the pass rate between different microorganisms in accommodations and beauty salons(χ~2=121.448,P < 0.01,χ~2= 11.563,P < 0.01).The qualified rate of sanitary wares and public goods in the accommodations was the lowest,being 78.35%.The difference was statistically significant(χ~2= 23.593,P < 0.01),followed by the hairdressing appliances in the beauty salons.The pass rate was 90.00%,and the difference was not statistically significant.The qualified rate of indoor air in urban areas was lower,being 95.00%,and the qualified rate of public goods was lower than the lower part of the city,which was 68.25%.There was no statistically significant difference in the passing rate of indoor air and public goods in urban and remote urban areas.Conclusion The qualified rate of this double random sampling test is relatively high,and the health status of most public places in Wuhan is good,indicating that the establishment of a sanitary city has certain effects.The health supervision department shall strengthen the publicity of the small hotel,and the relevant departments shall supervise the washing and disinfecting company.
Objective To understand the basic sanitation status of public places in Wuhan,prevent the occurrence of health incidents in Wuhan,and to ensure the public health and safety in public places.Methods Public places in Wuhan were sampled by a double random method,and 68 public places were sampled including the kind of accommodation,beauty salons,culture and entertainment.The indoor air and public goods appliances in these public places were tested and evaluated according to the relevant national standards "Public Health Inspection Methods for Public Places Part 6:Health Monitoring Technical Specifications".Results A total of 820 pieces of supplies were sampled in 68 public places,among which 738 pieces were qualified,and the pass rate was 90.00%.The difference of qualified rate in different types of public places was statistically significant(χ~2=7.345,P < 0.05).The indoor air testing had the lowest qualified rate of 87.76%;the lowest qualified rate of bacteria in the residential area was 58.52%,followed by the beauty salon,and the pass rate of Escherichia coli was 85.14%.There was a statistically significant difference in the pass rate between different microorganisms in accommodations and beauty salons(χ~2=121.448,P < 0.01,χ~2= 11.563,P < 0.01).The qualified rate of sanitary wares and public goods in the accommodations was the lowest,being 78.35%.The difference was statistically significant(χ~2= 23.593,P < 0.01),followed by the hairdressing appliances in the beauty salons.The pass rate was 90.00%,and the difference was not statistically significant.The qualified rate of indoor air in urban areas was lower,being 95.00%,and the qualified rate of public goods was lower than the lower part of the city,which was 68.25%.There was no statistically significant difference in the passing rate of indoor air and public goods in urban and remote urban areas.Conclusion The qualified rate of this double random sampling test is relatively high,and the health status of most public places in Wuhan is good,indicating that the establishment of a sanitary city has certain effects.The health supervision department shall strengthen the publicity of the small hotel,and the relevant departments shall supervise the washing and disinfecting company.
引文
[1]王玲,马晓军,刘斌,等.2015年成都市公共场所卫生监测结果分析[J].预防医学情报杂志,2017,33(1):72-74.
[2]苏海涛,何英华,解名环,等.200家公共场所卫生监测结果分析[J].中国卫生工程学,2014,13(5):398-402.
[3]中华人民共和国国家质量监督检验检疫总局.GB/T 18204.6-2013公共场所卫生检验方法第6部分:卫生监测技术规范[S].北京:中国标准出版社,2013.
[4]中华人民共和国国家质量监督检验检疫总局.GB/T 18204.6-2013公共场所卫生检验方法第2部分:化学污染物[S].北京:中国标准出版社,2014.
[5]石国栋.泰安市泰山区185家公共场所卫生监测结果分析[J].当代医学,2017,23(12):42-46.
[6]陆红达.2011年江阴市旅店业公共用品用具卫生状况调查[J].医学动物防制,2013,29(2):197-198.
[7]李冬梅.石嘴山市惠农区公共浴室消毒和环境质量监测结果分析[J].宁夏医学杂志,2017,39(1):85-87.
[8]刘学军,钞艳.银川市公共用品清洗消毒机构卫生现状分析[J].宁夏医学杂志,2014,36(12):1216-1217.
[9]杨保国.某县级公共场所用品用具卫生质量监测[J].中国消毒学杂志,2014,31(12):1365-1366.
[10]尹小燕,陈宏宇.公共场所公共用品的微生物检测分析[J].中国农村卫生,2017,10(10):37.
[11]吕雅玲,叶文迪,陈秀凤.南安市2011-2014年公共场所公共用品卫生状况调查[J].海峡预防医学杂志,2015,21(3):64-66.
[12]刘玉芳.2015年驻马店市旅店业公共用品卫生监测结果分析[J].河南预防医学杂志,2017,28(1):77-78.
[13]姚淑连,姜春全.关于公共用品和餐具消毒效果监测结果分析[J].医学信息,2015,29(18):162-162.
[14]梁茜,刘庆.2013-2015年泸州市龙马潭区美容美发公共用品卫生监测分析[J].中国卫生产业,2017,14(28):19-20.
[15]张文琴,苗青,陶晓燕.公共场所公共用品卫生检测结果的分析研究[J].中国保健营养,2016,26(28):373.
[16]曹红亚.公共场所公共用品微生物监测分析[J].医药前沿,2015,15(22):38-38,39.
[17]丁丽琨.旅店业公共用品消毒状况分析[J].大家健康(上旬版),2017,11(4):40-41.
[2]苏海涛,何英华,解名环,等.200家公共场所卫生监测结果分析[J].中国卫生工程学,2014,13(5):398-402.
[3]中华人民共和国国家质量监督检验检疫总局.GB/T 18204.6-2013公共场所卫生检验方法第6部分:卫生监测技术规范[S].北京:中国标准出版社,2013.
[4]中华人民共和国国家质量监督检验检疫总局.GB/T 18204.6-2013公共场所卫生检验方法第2部分:化学污染物[S].北京:中国标准出版社,2014.
[5]石国栋.泰安市泰山区185家公共场所卫生监测结果分析[J].当代医学,2017,23(12):42-46.
[6]陆红达.2011年江阴市旅店业公共用品用具卫生状况调查[J].医学动物防制,2013,29(2):197-198.
[7]李冬梅.石嘴山市惠农区公共浴室消毒和环境质量监测结果分析[J].宁夏医学杂志,2017,39(1):85-87.
[8]刘学军,钞艳.银川市公共用品清洗消毒机构卫生现状分析[J].宁夏医学杂志,2014,36(12):1216-1217.
[9]杨保国.某县级公共场所用品用具卫生质量监测[J].中国消毒学杂志,2014,31(12):1365-1366.
[10]尹小燕,陈宏宇.公共场所公共用品的微生物检测分析[J].中国农村卫生,2017,10(10):37.
[11]吕雅玲,叶文迪,陈秀凤.南安市2011-2014年公共场所公共用品卫生状况调查[J].海峡预防医学杂志,2015,21(3):64-66.
[12]刘玉芳.2015年驻马店市旅店业公共用品卫生监测结果分析[J].河南预防医学杂志,2017,28(1):77-78.
[13]姚淑连,姜春全.关于公共用品和餐具消毒效果监测结果分析[J].医学信息,2015,29(18):162-162.
[14]梁茜,刘庆.2013-2015年泸州市龙马潭区美容美发公共用品卫生监测分析[J].中国卫生产业,2017,14(28):19-20.
[15]张文琴,苗青,陶晓燕.公共场所公共用品卫生检测结果的分析研究[J].中国保健营养,2016,26(28):373.
[16]曹红亚.公共场所公共用品微生物监测分析[J].医药前沿,2015,15(22):38-38,39.
[17]丁丽琨.旅店业公共用品消毒状况分析[J].大家健康(上旬版),2017,11(4):40-41.
© 2004-2018 中国地质图书馆版权所有 京ICP备05064691号 京公网安备11010802017129号 地址：北京市海淀区学院路29号 邮编：100083 电话：办公室：(+86 10)66554848；文献借阅、咨询服务、科技查新：66554700 |