• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

比较急症医院的书面程序与自我报告的呼吸防护措施。

Comparing written programs and self-reported respiratory protection practices in acute care hospitals.

作者信息

Sietsema Margaret, Conroy Lorraine M, Brosseau Lisa M

机构信息

a School of Public Health , University of Illinois at Chicago , Chicago , Illinois.

出版信息

J Occup Environ Hyg. 2015;12(3):189-98. doi: 10.1080/15459624.2014.960576.

DOI:10.1080/15459624.2014.960576
PMID:25288024
Abstract

Airborne biological hazards in hospitals require the use of respiratory protection. A well-implemented respiratory protection program can protect health care workers from these exposures. This study examines the relationship between written respiratory programs and reported practices in health care settings. Twenty-eight hospitals in Illinois and Minnesota were recruited to a study of respiratory protection programs and practices in acute care settings. Interviews were conducted with hospital managers, unit managers, and health care workers from departments where respirators are commonly required. Each hospital's written respiratory protection program was scored for the 11 elements required by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), using a standardized tool, for a maximum possible score of 22 (2 pts. per element). Twenty interview questions associated with program practices were also scored by percent correct responses. Written program scores ranged from 2-17 with an average of 9.2. Hospital and unit managers scored on average 82% and 81%, respectively, when compared to the OSHA standard; health care workers scored significantly lower, 71% (p < 0.001). Minnesota written program scores were not significantly higher than Illinois hospitals (p = 0.16), while all Illinois survey respondents scored higher than those in Minnesota (p < 0.001). There was no trend between written programs and interview responses. Written respiratory protection programs in the study sites did not provide the level of detail required OSHA. Interview responses representing hospital practices surrounding respiratory protection indicated that hospitals were aware of and following regulatory guidelines.

摘要

医院中的空气传播生物危害需要使用呼吸防护设备。一个实施良好的呼吸防护计划可以保护医护人员免受这些暴露的危害。本研究考察了书面呼吸计划与医疗环境中报告的实践之间的关系。伊利诺伊州和明尼苏达州的28家医院被纳入一项关于急性护理环境中呼吸防护计划与实践的研究。对医院管理人员、科室管理人员以及通常需要使用呼吸器的科室的医护人员进行了访谈。使用标准化工具,根据职业安全与健康管理局(OSHA)要求的11项要素,对每家医院的书面呼吸防护计划进行评分,最高可得22分(每项要素2分)。与计划实践相关的20个访谈问题也根据正确回答的百分比进行评分。书面计划得分在2至17分之间,平均分为9.2分。与OSHA标准相比,医院管理人员和科室管理人员的平均得分分别为82%和81%;医护人员的得分显著较低,为71%(p<0.001)。明尼苏达州的书面计划得分并不显著高于伊利诺伊州的医院(p = 0.16),而伊利诺伊州所有调查受访者的得分均高于明尼苏达州的受访者(p<0.001)。书面计划与访谈回答之间没有趋势关系。研究地点的书面呼吸防护计划未达到OSHA要求的详细程度。代表医院呼吸防护相关实践的访谈回答表明,医院了解并遵循监管指南。

相似文献

1
Comparing written programs and self-reported respiratory protection practices in acute care hospitals.比较急症医院的书面程序与自我报告的呼吸防护措施。
J Occup Environ Hyg. 2015;12(3):189-98. doi: 10.1080/15459624.2014.960576.
2
Evaluation of Minnesota and Illinois hospital respiratory protection programs and health care worker respirator use.明尼苏达州和伊利诺伊州医院呼吸防护计划及医护人员呼吸器使用情况评估。
J Occup Environ Hyg. 2015;12(1):1-15. doi: 10.1080/15459624.2014.930560.
3
Evaluation of respiratory protection programs and practices in California hospitals during the 2009-2010 H1N1 influenza pandemic.评估 2009-2010 年 H1N1 流感大流行期间加利福尼亚州医院的呼吸保护计划和实践。
Am J Infect Control. 2013 Nov;41(11):1024-31. doi: 10.1016/j.ajic.2013.05.006. Epub 2013 Aug 7.
4
Occupational exposure to tuberculosis--OSHA. Proposed rule and notice of public hearing.职业性接触结核病——职业安全与健康管理局。拟议规则及公众听证会通知。
Fed Regist. 1997 Oct 17;62(201):54160-308.
5
OSHA gives green light to use 'N95' respirators. Occupational Safety and Health Administration.美国职业安全与健康管理局批准使用“N95”口罩。美国职业安全与健康管理局。
AIDS Alert. 1995 Dec;10(12):154.
6
Compliance with OSHA's respiratory protection standard in hospitals.医院对职业安全与健康管理局呼吸防护标准的遵守情况。
Am Ind Hyg Assoc J. 1999 Mar-Apr;60(2):228-36. doi: 10.1080/00028899908984440.
7
Respiratory protection--OSHA. Final rule; request for comment on paperwork requirements.呼吸防护——职业安全与健康管理局。最终规则;关于文书工作要求的征求意见
Fed Regist. 1998 Jan 8;63(5):1152-300.
8
Differences in Hospital Managers', Unit Managers', and Health Care Workers' Perceptions of the Safety Climate for Respiratory Protection.医院管理人员、科室管理人员和医护人员对呼吸防护安全氛围认知的差异。
Workplace Health Saf. 2016 Jul;64(7):326-36. doi: 10.1177/2165079916640550. Epub 2016 Apr 7.
9
Respiratory protection in the health care setting.医疗机构中的呼吸防护。
Occup Med. 1997 Oct-Dec;12(4):641-54.
10
Improved tuberculosis infection control practices in Maryland acute care hospitals.马里兰州急症医院结核病感染控制措施的改进
Am J Infect Control. 2000 Apr;28(2):133-7.