某高校新生艾滋病知识、态度、技能调查及不同健康教育模式研究
|
摘要
目的了解北京市某高校新生艾滋病相关现状,并比较不同健康教育模式的干预效果。方法采用自行设计的艾滋病问卷对全体入学新生进行基线调查,随机抽取600名新生,分为4组,1组作为对照组,另外3组分别采用微信平台、健康讲座、同伴教育进行行为干预,分析不同干预模式对大学新生艾滋病知识、态度/技能的干预效果。结果大学新生中,女性(58.6%)、城市居民(64.7%)的学生艾滋病知识知晓水平更高(P<0.05);男性(46.7%)、城市居民(44.6%)的学生艾滋病态度/技能正向水平更高(P<0.05)。干预前4组间艾滋病知识知晓、态度/技能正向水平差异不显著(P>0.05);干预后,3组均较干预前及对照组(分别为55.3%, 44.7%)显著提高(P<0.05),其中健康讲座组知识知晓(92.0%)、态度/技能正向水平(88.7%)显著高于微信平台组(分别为74.0%、70.7%)和同伴教育组(分别为83.3%、75.3%)(P<0.05)。结论大学新生对艾滋病相关知识掌握不全面、对艾滋病态度/技能的正向水平较低。健康教育可有效改善相关现状,其中以健康讲座法效果最佳。
Objective To understand HIV/AIDS awareness, attitude and skills among freshmen in a university,and to compare the intervention effects of different health education models. Methods A self-administrated questionnaire was used to survey HIV/AIDS awareness, attitude and skills targeting all the freshmen college students as baseline survey. 600 students were randomly selected and divided into 4 groups: group 1 as the control group, other groups as intervention groups using WeChat platform, lecturing or peer education, respectively. The intervention effect of different intervention modes on HIV/AIDS knowledge, attitude and skills of freshmen were analyzed. Results Among the college freshmen, female students(58.6%) and urban residents(64.7%) had higher HIV/AIDS knowledge level(P<0.05), and male students(46. 7%) and urban residents(44. 6%) had higher HIV/AIDS attitude and skills(P <0. 05). There was no significant difference in the level of HIV/AIDS knowledge, attitude and skills among 4 groups before intervention( P >0.05). After intervention, 3 intervention groups were significantly higher than those before intervention and the control group(55.3%, 44.7%, respectively)(P < 0. 05). Among them, knowledge awareness(92.0%) and positive attitude and skill(88. 7%) in health lecture group were significantly higher than those in WeChat platform group(74. 0%,70.7%) and peer education group(83.3%, 75.3%, respectively)(P < 0.05). Conclusion Freshmen' s knowledge about HIV/AIDS is not comprehensive, their positive HIV/AIDS attitudes and skills are relatively low. Health education can effectively improve the current situation, and the health lecture method is the best.
Objective To understand HIV/AIDS awareness, attitude and skills among freshmen in a university,and to compare the intervention effects of different health education models. Methods A self-administrated questionnaire was used to survey HIV/AIDS awareness, attitude and skills targeting all the freshmen college students as baseline survey. 600 students were randomly selected and divided into 4 groups: group 1 as the control group, other groups as intervention groups using WeChat platform, lecturing or peer education, respectively. The intervention effect of different intervention modes on HIV/AIDS knowledge, attitude and skills of freshmen were analyzed. Results Among the college freshmen, female students(58.6%) and urban residents(64.7%) had higher HIV/AIDS knowledge level(P<0.05), and male students(46. 7%) and urban residents(44. 6%) had higher HIV/AIDS attitude and skills(P <0. 05). There was no significant difference in the level of HIV/AIDS knowledge, attitude and skills among 4 groups before intervention( P >0.05). After intervention, 3 intervention groups were significantly higher than those before intervention and the control group(55.3%, 44.7%, respectively)(P < 0. 05). Among them, knowledge awareness(92.0%) and positive attitude and skill(88. 7%) in health lecture group were significantly higher than those in WeChat platform group(74. 0%,70.7%) and peer education group(83.3%, 75.3%, respectively)(P < 0.05). Conclusion Freshmen' s knowledge about HIV/AIDS is not comprehensive, their positive HIV/AIDS attitudes and skills are relatively low. Health education can effectively improve the current situation, and the health lecture method is the best.
引文
[1]吴尊友.我国学校艾滋病防控形势及策略[J].中国学校卫生,2015,36(11):1604-1605.
[2]黄晓光,何继绥,田春辉,等.大学生艾滋病防治知识态度行为调查[J].中国公共卫生2015,31(2):249-251.
[3]国务院办公厅.国务院办公厅关于印发中国遏制与防治艾滋病“十三五”行动计划的通知:国办发[2017]8号[A/OL].(2017-02-05)[2017-02-15]. http://www. gov. cn/zhengce/content/2017-02/05/content_5165514. htm.
[4]国家卫生计生委办公厅,教育部办公厅.关于建立疫情通报制度进一步加强高校艾滋病防控工作的通知:国卫办疾控发[2015]40号[A/OL].(2015-07-15)[2018-01-18]. http://www. moh. gov. cn/jkj/s3585/201508/e4c8a1e6809o4a8e9c49f7f8708873d1. shtml.
[5]张北雁,刘庄.北京市某高校新生艾滋病基本知识态度和教育需求调查[J].中国校医,2016,30(6):424-425.
[6]王继承.中美大学生艾滋病知-信-行健康教育模式比较及其启示[J].现代预防医学,2015,42(15):2757-2759.
[7]叶芬梅,吴亚琼,赵群.中美高校大学生艾滋病知识、态度与行为实证分析[J].青年探索,2017(3):103-112.
[8] Gomez CA,Tat SA,Allen D,et al. What will it take to end the HIV/AIDS epidemic linking the most disenfranchised into care through outreach[J]. AIDS Patient Care STDS.2017,31(3):122-128.
[9]李艳萍,张小玲,谢文静,等.南昌市高中生艾滋病短期健康教育效果评价[J].中国艾滋病性病,2017,23(1):69-72.
[10]胡艳红,范勇.长沙市岳麓区大学生艾滋病相关知识行为调查[J].实用预防医学,2013,20(4):422-424.
[11]贾改珍,闫阳,徐天和,等.多水平模型在大学生预防艾滋病健康教育影响因素分析中的应用[J].中国卫生统计,2013,30(2):37-39.
[12]彭再如,季庆辉,桂建伟,等.湖南省高校艾滋病知识宣传教育调查研分析[J].实用预防医学,2015,22(5):570-572.
[13]呙丽华.不同健康教育方式对青岛市某高校学生艾滋病相关知识、态度、行为干预效果的分析[J].医学与社会,2016,29(6):67-70.
[14]张婉青,郎靖,卓琳,等.大学生不同艾滋病健康教育模式效果比较[J].中国学校卫生,2017,38(8):1175-1178.
[15]徐亚吉,周传力,胡珍.中国大学生艾滋病知信行现状分析[J].中国学校卫生,2014,35(4):487-489.
[16] Abdi F,Simbar M. The peer education approach in adolescents-narrative review article[J]. Iran J Public Health, 2013,42(11):1200-1206.
[17] Fletcher G. The knowledge gap:examining the rhetoric and implementation of peer education for HIV prevention in Myanmar[J]. Sex Education,2015,15(4):378-391.
[18]孙爱,陈建伟,何子健,等.广州高校新生互动式艾滋病同伴教育师资培训效果分析[J].中国学校卫生,2016, 37(3):344-347.
[19]高玉骞,王辉,其其格,薛峰.内蒙古自治区大学生艾滋病知信行调查及健康教育模式研究[J].中国全科医学,2011,14(7):782-784.
[20] Parthasarathy K,Hui SK, Narayanan S,et al. Assessing the impact of peer educator outreach on the likelihood and acceleration of clinic utilization among sex workers[J]. PloS One, 2016, 11(7):e0159656.
[21]张冬.某高校大学生微信平台干预前后艾滋病知识和态度影响研究[D].北京:中国疾病预防控制中心,2016.
[2]黄晓光,何继绥,田春辉,等.大学生艾滋病防治知识态度行为调查[J].中国公共卫生2015,31(2):249-251.
[3]国务院办公厅.国务院办公厅关于印发中国遏制与防治艾滋病“十三五”行动计划的通知:国办发[2017]8号[A/OL].(2017-02-05)[2017-02-15]. http://www. gov. cn/zhengce/content/2017-02/05/content_5165514. htm.
[4]国家卫生计生委办公厅,教育部办公厅.关于建立疫情通报制度进一步加强高校艾滋病防控工作的通知:国卫办疾控发[2015]40号[A/OL].(2015-07-15)[2018-01-18]. http://www. moh. gov. cn/jkj/s3585/201508/e4c8a1e6809o4a8e9c49f7f8708873d1. shtml.
[5]张北雁,刘庄.北京市某高校新生艾滋病基本知识态度和教育需求调查[J].中国校医,2016,30(6):424-425.
[6]王继承.中美大学生艾滋病知-信-行健康教育模式比较及其启示[J].现代预防医学,2015,42(15):2757-2759.
[7]叶芬梅,吴亚琼,赵群.中美高校大学生艾滋病知识、态度与行为实证分析[J].青年探索,2017(3):103-112.
[8] Gomez CA,Tat SA,Allen D,et al. What will it take to end the HIV/AIDS epidemic linking the most disenfranchised into care through outreach[J]. AIDS Patient Care STDS.2017,31(3):122-128.
[9]李艳萍,张小玲,谢文静,等.南昌市高中生艾滋病短期健康教育效果评价[J].中国艾滋病性病,2017,23(1):69-72.
[10]胡艳红,范勇.长沙市岳麓区大学生艾滋病相关知识行为调查[J].实用预防医学,2013,20(4):422-424.
[11]贾改珍,闫阳,徐天和,等.多水平模型在大学生预防艾滋病健康教育影响因素分析中的应用[J].中国卫生统计,2013,30(2):37-39.
[12]彭再如,季庆辉,桂建伟,等.湖南省高校艾滋病知识宣传教育调查研分析[J].实用预防医学,2015,22(5):570-572.
[13]呙丽华.不同健康教育方式对青岛市某高校学生艾滋病相关知识、态度、行为干预效果的分析[J].医学与社会,2016,29(6):67-70.
[14]张婉青,郎靖,卓琳,等.大学生不同艾滋病健康教育模式效果比较[J].中国学校卫生,2017,38(8):1175-1178.
[15]徐亚吉,周传力,胡珍.中国大学生艾滋病知信行现状分析[J].中国学校卫生,2014,35(4):487-489.
[16] Abdi F,Simbar M. The peer education approach in adolescents-narrative review article[J]. Iran J Public Health, 2013,42(11):1200-1206.
[17] Fletcher G. The knowledge gap:examining the rhetoric and implementation of peer education for HIV prevention in Myanmar[J]. Sex Education,2015,15(4):378-391.
[18]孙爱,陈建伟,何子健,等.广州高校新生互动式艾滋病同伴教育师资培训效果分析[J].中国学校卫生,2016, 37(3):344-347.
[19]高玉骞,王辉,其其格,薛峰.内蒙古自治区大学生艾滋病知信行调查及健康教育模式研究[J].中国全科医学,2011,14(7):782-784.
[20] Parthasarathy K,Hui SK, Narayanan S,et al. Assessing the impact of peer educator outreach on the likelihood and acceleration of clinic utilization among sex workers[J]. PloS One, 2016, 11(7):e0159656.
[21]张冬.某高校大学生微信平台干预前后艾滋病知识和态度影响研究[D].北京:中国疾病预防控制中心,2016.