目的 探讨基于计划行为理论的安全注射培训方案对护理学专业学生安全注射知识、信念和行为的影响。方法 采用试验对照方法。于2018年选取某医学院校2015级四年制护理学专业80名学生为研究对象,以抛硬币法将其分为试验组和对照组,试验组41名学生,对照组39名学生。在安全注射培训中,试验组学生在常规教育的基础上,进行基于计划行为理论的安全注射培训,对照组学生接受常规教育。分别于培训前、培训后1个月和3个月采用问卷调查学生安全注射的知识、信念与行为水平。2名教师对学生的行为进行评分。结果 培训后1个月和3个月,试验组学生的安全注射自评总分和教师现场评价总分均高于对照组学生。试验组和对照组培训后1个月评价分数比较:自评总分[(208.34±17.43)分比(194.18±11.83)分,P<0.01];现场评价总分[(15.20±1.21)分比(12.03±1.66)分,P<0.01]。试验组和对照组培训后3个月评价分数比较:自评总分[(204.61±13.52)分比(194.10±8.18)分,P<0.01];现场评价总分[(13.61±1.14)分比(12.46±1.10)分,P<0.01]。结论 基于计划行为理论安全注射培训方案可以提高护理学专业学生的安全注射知识和态度水平,改善注射行为。
Objective To explore the impact of training program based on the Theory of planned behavior (TPB) on nursing undergraduates' knowledge, attitude and practice (KAP) of safe injection.Methods Totally 80 students from the nursing students in internship from a medical university were selected in 2018, and the students were randomly assigned as the experimental group (n=41) and the control group (n=39). The experimental group was administered a TPB-based safe injection behavior training program on the basis of conventional safe injection education;the control group received conventional safe injection education, including the pre-job training and guidance from the clinical teachers. The scores of knowledge, attitude and practice of safe injection from both groups were compared through KAP questionnaire of safe injection in nursing students before and after the training (1 month and 3 months). Two teachers used the observation table of safe injection to score the students' behavior.Results After the training (1 month and 3 months), the self-evaluation total score and the observation score of aseptic operation andpreventing sharp instrument injuryin the experimental groupwere all higher than those in the control group. In 1 month after the training, the self-evaluation total score of the experimental group and the control group were [(208.34±17.43) vs. (194.18±11.83), P<0.01], the observation total scores of the experimental group and the control group were [(15.20±1.21) vs. (12.03±1.66), P<0.01]. In 3 month after the training, the self-evaluation total score of the experimental group and the control group were [ (204.61±13.52) vs. (194.10±8.18), P<0.01], the observation total scores of the experimental group and the control group were [(13.61±1.14) vs. (12.46±1.10), P<0.01].Conclusions TPB-based safe injection training program can improve nursing students' knowledge, attitude and practice.
[1] 医院感染防控国家主题行动计划—行动起来,让注射更安全(2014-2017年)[EB/OL].[2020-01-28].https://wenku.baidu.com/view/21f788b31be8b8f67c1cfad6195f312b3169eb98.html.
[2] Pépin J, Abou Chakra CN, Pépin E, et al. Evolution of the global burden of viral infections from unsafe medical injections, 2000-2010[J]. PLoS One, 2014,9(6):e99677. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0099677.
[3] Higginson R,Parry A.Needlestick injuries and safety syringes: a review of the literature[J].Br J Nurs,2013,22(8):S4,S6-S8,S10. DOI:10.12968/bjon.2013.22.Sup5.S4.
[4] 吕芷娴,周文芸,殷慧敏,等.医院实施安全注射制度的效果评价[J].中华医院感染学杂志,2019,29(12):1911-1916. DOI: 10.11816/cn.ni.2019-196048.
[5] 韩玉,彭杨灵,曲波,等.计划行为理论及其在医学中的研究应用[J].实用预防医学,2015,22(6):763-765. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-3110.2015.06.043.
[6] 侯明香,芦桂芝,王静波,等.学生安全注射知信行问卷的编制及信效度评价[J].护理学报,2017,24(22):7-11.DOI:10.16460/j.issn1008-9969.2017.22.007.
[7] Çiçek-Şentürk G,Tekin A,Gürbüz Y,et al.Retrospective investigation of 9 years of data on needlestick and sharps injuries: effect of a hospital infection control committee[J]. Am J Infect Control,2019,47(2):186-190. DOI:10.1016/j.ajic.2018.07.015.
[8] 蔡标,申国明,黄金玲,等.运用艾宾浩斯记忆法规律提高医学教学效果[J].赤峰学院学报(自然科学版),2016,32(15):76-77. DOI: 10.13398/j.cnki.issn1673-260x.2016.15.030.