北京市居民应急知识水平现状及其影响因素分析
|
摘要
目的了解北京市居民应急知识水平现状及其影响因素,为提高公众应急能力建设提供更好的理论依据和决策依据。方法 2015年7—10月,采用多阶段抽样方法在北京市16个区县开展应急知识水平的调查,本次研究发放问卷11 052份,回收有效问卷11 006份,调查内容包括年龄、性别、职业、文化程度等社会人口学特征以及与应急知识相关的6个维度的问题。采用单因素方差分析、χ~2检验和多因素logistic回归进行统计分析。结果北京市区居民应急知识各维度得分率分别为:消化道传染病应急知识(0.76±0.19)、自然灾害急救知识(0.76±0.14)、禽流感应急知识(0.73±0.21)、社会事件应急知识(0.72±0.34)、呼吸道传染病应急知识(0.70±0.14)和事故灾难急救知识(0.67±0.16);方差分析结果显示,不同功能区域在各个应急知识维度的差异有统计学意义。多因素分析结果显示,居民应急知识得分率比较中,城市发展新区和生态涵养发展区相对于首都功能核心区OR值分别为0.720、0.820;相对于30～39岁人群,≤18岁、19～29岁、50～59岁和≥60岁人群OR值分别为0.426、0.711、0.627和0.560;相对于文化程度为小学及以下,高中/中专、大专和本科及以上OR值分别为3.084、3.791和4.600;相对于机关、企事业单位管理者,医务人员和专业技术人员OR值分别为2.561和1.709;对本地区传染病的关注程度中,相对于不关心,一般关心和非常关心的OR值分别为1.346和1.762;和家人讨论如何应对灾害事件的频率中,相对于从不,很少和经常的OR值分别为1.473和1.370。结论行政分区、年龄、文化程度、职业、对本地区传染病的关注程度以及和家人讨论如何应对灾害事件的频率是影响应急知识得分率的因素。应进一步提高公众的应急水平和能力,加大应急演练的宣传力度,建立以社区为基础的培训体系。
Objective To examine the status quo and influencing factors of emergency knowledge among residents in Beijing and to provide evidences for improving emergency response capacity among the public. Methods We conducted a face-to-face questionnaire survey among 11 052 residents selected with multistage random sampling in 16 districts or counties of Beijing between July and October 2015. Information on demographics and awareness of 6 dimensions of emergency knowledge were collected. Analysis of variance(ANOVA) and chi-square for univariate analysis and binary logistic regression for multivariate analysis were adopted in data analyses. Results Among the 11 006 valid respondents, the knowledge scores were 0.76 ± 0.19 for digestive tract infectious disease, 0.76 ± 0.14 for natural disaster knowledge, 0.73 ±0.21 for bird flu, 0.72 ± 0.34 for social events, 0.70 ± 0.14 for respiratory infectious disease, and 0.67 ± 0.16 for accident disaster, respectively. ANOVA results demonstrated significant differences in the scores for various dimensions of emergency knowledge among the respondents from various functional districts of Beijing. The results of multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that the respondents′ emergency knowledge scores were influenced by their residential region,age, education level, occupation, concern about local epidemic of infectious disease, and the frequency for having a discussion with family members on how to deal with a disaster event; the respondents from new urban development and ecological conservation development regions were likely to have a lower score compared to those from capital functional core region, with the odds ratio(OR) of 0.720 and 0.820; the respondents aged 18, 19 – 29, 50 – 59 and ≥ 60 years were likely to have a lower score compared to those aged 30 – 39 years, with the ORs of 0.426, 0.711, 0.627 and 0.560; the respondents with the education of senior high school/technical secondary school, junior college, and undergraduate were likely to have a higher score compared to those with the education of primary school and lower, with the ORs of 3.084, 3.791 and 4.600; the respondents being medical staff and technical personnel were likely to have a higher score than those being administers of government agency or enterprise and public institution, with the ORs of 2.561 and 1.709; the respondents reporting having concern and high concern about local epidemic of infectious disease were likely to have a higher score compared to those reporting not having concern about the epidemic, with the ORs of 1.346 and 1.762; and the respondents rarely and usually having a discussion with family members on how to deal with a disaster event were likely to have a higher score compared to those never having the discussion, with the ORs of 1.473 and 1.370, respectively. Conclusion The awareness of emergency knowledge is influenced by residential region, age, education level, occupation, concern about local epidemic of infectious disease, and the frequency for having a discussion with family members on how to deal with a disaster event among the residents of Beijing. The emergency knowledge and management capacity should be improved in the public in Beijing.
Objective To examine the status quo and influencing factors of emergency knowledge among residents in Beijing and to provide evidences for improving emergency response capacity among the public. Methods We conducted a face-to-face questionnaire survey among 11 052 residents selected with multistage random sampling in 16 districts or counties of Beijing between July and October 2015. Information on demographics and awareness of 6 dimensions of emergency knowledge were collected. Analysis of variance(ANOVA) and chi-square for univariate analysis and binary logistic regression for multivariate analysis were adopted in data analyses. Results Among the 11 006 valid respondents, the knowledge scores were 0.76 ± 0.19 for digestive tract infectious disease, 0.76 ± 0.14 for natural disaster knowledge, 0.73 ±0.21 for bird flu, 0.72 ± 0.34 for social events, 0.70 ± 0.14 for respiratory infectious disease, and 0.67 ± 0.16 for accident disaster, respectively. ANOVA results demonstrated significant differences in the scores for various dimensions of emergency knowledge among the respondents from various functional districts of Beijing. The results of multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that the respondents′ emergency knowledge scores were influenced by their residential region,age, education level, occupation, concern about local epidemic of infectious disease, and the frequency for having a discussion with family members on how to deal with a disaster event; the respondents from new urban development and ecological conservation development regions were likely to have a lower score compared to those from capital functional core region, with the odds ratio(OR) of 0.720 and 0.820; the respondents aged 18, 19 – 29, 50 – 59 and ≥ 60 years were likely to have a lower score compared to those aged 30 – 39 years, with the ORs of 0.426, 0.711, 0.627 and 0.560; the respondents with the education of senior high school/technical secondary school, junior college, and undergraduate were likely to have a higher score compared to those with the education of primary school and lower, with the ORs of 3.084, 3.791 and 4.600; the respondents being medical staff and technical personnel were likely to have a higher score than those being administers of government agency or enterprise and public institution, with the ORs of 2.561 and 1.709; the respondents reporting having concern and high concern about local epidemic of infectious disease were likely to have a higher score compared to those reporting not having concern about the epidemic, with the ORs of 1.346 and 1.762; and the respondents rarely and usually having a discussion with family members on how to deal with a disaster event were likely to have a higher score compared to those never having the discussion, with the ORs of 1.473 and 1.370, respectively. Conclusion The awareness of emergency knowledge is influenced by residential region, age, education level, occupation, concern about local epidemic of infectious disease, and the frequency for having a discussion with family members on how to deal with a disaster event among the residents of Beijing. The emergency knowledge and management capacity should be improved in the public in Beijing.
引文
[1]张文娟,郝艳华,吴群红,等.突发公共事件公众应急能力评价的概念框架探讨[J].中国公共卫生管理, 2013, 29(5):578–580.
[2]叶冬青,查震球.我国突发公共卫生事件的新特点与应对新策略[J].中华疾病控制杂志, 2009, 13(1):1–3.
[3]卫生部.卫生部关于开展全民健康生活方式行动的通知[Z].卫办疾控发[2007]189号, 2007.
[4]Iemura H, Takahashi Y, Pradono MH, et al. Earthquake and tsunami questionnaires in Banda Aceh and surrounding areas[J].Dis Prev Manag, 2006, 15(1):21–30.
[5]程庆林,胡连鑫,李杰,等.农村居民突发公共卫生事件应对能力调查分析[J].中国卫生事业管理, 2010(8):547–549.
[6]Larsson G, Enander A. Preparing for disaster:public attitudes and actions[J]. Disaster Prevention and Management:an International Journal, 1997, 6(1):11–21.
[7]董泽宇.公众应急培训的特征、现状与发展方向[J].中国应急管理, 2012, 70(10):9–12.
[8]陈志强,郝艳华,宁宁,等.北京、黑龙江居民应急知识技能水平及影响因素分析[J].中国公共卫生, 2017, 33(5):715–717.
[9]Mcneil S, Quarantelli EL, Mcneil S, et al. Past, present and future:building an interdisciplinary disaster research center on a halfcentury of social science disaster research[C]. Nanjing, China:The International Conference on Risk, Crisis and Management, Disaster Research Center, 2008.
[10]陈镭,张晓红,林南,等.苍南县居民应对突发自然灾害认知与需求调查[J].中国农村卫生事业管理, 2013, 33(7):785–787.
[11]陈艳.北京市朝阳区公众应对突发公共卫生事件知识与技能调查研究[D].北京:中国疾病预防控制中心硕士毕业论文, 2009.
[12]程庆林,胡连鑫,李杰,等.农民突发公共卫生事件应对能力影响因素分析[J].中国公共卫生, 2012, 28(4):449–450.
[13]邵立波,张艳清.论加强医学生的生命教育[J].卫生职业教育,2010(1):5–6.
[2]叶冬青,查震球.我国突发公共卫生事件的新特点与应对新策略[J].中华疾病控制杂志, 2009, 13(1):1–3.
[3]卫生部.卫生部关于开展全民健康生活方式行动的通知[Z].卫办疾控发[2007]189号, 2007.
[4]Iemura H, Takahashi Y, Pradono MH, et al. Earthquake and tsunami questionnaires in Banda Aceh and surrounding areas[J].Dis Prev Manag, 2006, 15(1):21–30.
[5]程庆林,胡连鑫,李杰,等.农村居民突发公共卫生事件应对能力调查分析[J].中国卫生事业管理, 2010(8):547–549.
[6]Larsson G, Enander A. Preparing for disaster:public attitudes and actions[J]. Disaster Prevention and Management:an International Journal, 1997, 6(1):11–21.
[7]董泽宇.公众应急培训的特征、现状与发展方向[J].中国应急管理, 2012, 70(10):9–12.
[8]陈志强,郝艳华,宁宁,等.北京、黑龙江居民应急知识技能水平及影响因素分析[J].中国公共卫生, 2017, 33(5):715–717.
[9]Mcneil S, Quarantelli EL, Mcneil S, et al. Past, present and future:building an interdisciplinary disaster research center on a halfcentury of social science disaster research[C]. Nanjing, China:The International Conference on Risk, Crisis and Management, Disaster Research Center, 2008.
[10]陈镭,张晓红,林南,等.苍南县居民应对突发自然灾害认知与需求调查[J].中国农村卫生事业管理, 2013, 33(7):785–787.
[11]陈艳.北京市朝阳区公众应对突发公共卫生事件知识与技能调查研究[D].北京:中国疾病预防控制中心硕士毕业论文, 2009.
[12]程庆林,胡连鑫,李杰,等.农民突发公共卫生事件应对能力影响因素分析[J].中国公共卫生, 2012, 28(4):449–450.
[13]邵立波,张艳清.论加强医学生的生命教育[J].卫生职业教育,2010(1):5–6.
© 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 |