高级检索
吴洪涛, 王超男, 廖凯举, 李冰, 许真. 中国卫生行政部门应急能力评估分析[J]. 中国公共卫生, 2020, 36(1): 50-55. DOI: 10.11847/zgggws1125450
引用本文: 吴洪涛, 王超男, 廖凯举, 李冰, 许真. 中国卫生行政部门应急能力评估分析[J]. 中国公共卫生, 2020, 36(1): 50-55. DOI: 10.11847/zgggws1125450
Hong-tao WU, Chao-nan WANG, Kai-ju LIAO, . Health emergency management capabilities of health administrative sectors in China[J]. Chinese Journal of Public Health, 2020, 36(1): 50-55. DOI: 10.11847/zgggws1125450
Citation: Hong-tao WU, Chao-nan WANG, Kai-ju LIAO, . Health emergency management capabilities of health administrative sectors in China[J]. Chinese Journal of Public Health, 2020, 36(1): 50-55. DOI: 10.11847/zgggws1125450

中国卫生行政部门应急能力评估分析

Health emergency management capabilities of health administrative sectors in China

  • 摘要:
      目的  了解中国卫生行政部门卫生应急能力现状,发现卫生应急能力存在的不足,为合理配置卫生应急资源,明确卫生应急能力建设工作的重点提供科学依据。
      方法  采用普查的方法,基于2014年国家卫生计生委回收的全国卫生应急能力评估数据,对中国31个省级、342个市级、2 995个县级卫生行政部门进行问卷调查;卫生应急能力评估指标体系包含8个一级指标(体系建设、应急队伍、装备储备、培训演练、宣教科研、监测预警、应急处置、善后评估)、24个二级指标和81个三级指标;据此设计调查问卷并制定赋分标准,应急能力评估满分为900分,将原始分转换成百分制进行描述比较;采用K-均值聚类分析法将得分划分为高、中、低3类。
      结果  实际回收有效填报数据省级30个,市级307个,县级2 584个;全国省、市、县三级卫生行政部门的应急能力评估总分均值分别为82.7、77.9、75.8分;省级卫生行政部门东、中、西部得分分别为83.7、79.6、83.9分;市级卫生行政部门东、中、西部得分分别为83.3、76.7、74.8分;县级卫生行政部门东、中、西部得分分别为78.7、75.0、73.8分。
      结论  全国卫生行政部门应急能力在区域和行政级别上存在差异,基层能力亟需加强;总体应急能力中的善后评估、培训演练、宣教科研能力有待提高。

     

    Abstract:
      Objective  To examine health emergency management capabilities of health administrative sectors in China and to identify deficiencies in emergency management capabilities for providing evidences to reasonable allocation of health resources and the construction of health emergency management capability in the administrative sectors.
      Methods  The data of the study were from a national survey on health emergency management capacity, which was sponsored by National Health and Family Planning Commission and conducted among 31 provincial, 342 municipal, and 2 995 county level health administrative agencies in 2014; the survey adopted an index system consisting of 8 primary indices (system structure, emergency response team, equipment and reserve, training and drill, propaganda/education and scientific research, surveillance and early warning, emergency response, rehabilitating evaluation), 34 secondary indices, and 81 tertiary indices; the maximum score for the evaluation on the capability of an administrative sector was 900 and the maximum score was converted to centesimal scale in data analysis.
      Results  Valid information were collected from in 30 provincial, 307 municipal, and 2 584 county level administrative sectors in the survey and the average scores for health emergency management capability of the administrative sectors at the three levels were 82.7, 77.9 and 75.8, respectively. For the health administrative sectors in the eastern, central and western region of China, the capability scores were 83.7, 79.6 and 83.9 for the provincial sectors; the scores were 83.3, 76.7 and 74.8 for the municipal sectors; and the scores were 78.7, 75.0 and 73.8 for the county sectors, respectively.
      Conclusion  There were administrative level and regional differences in health emergency management capabilities of health administrative sectors and the capabilities of grassroots administrative sectors need to be improved. The health emergency management capability-related rehabilitating evaluation training and drill, propaganda/education and scientific research should be promoted for health administrative sectors at different levels.

     

/

返回文章
返回