论文部分内容阅读
目的:通过对两组药师化疗职业防护情况的对比和分析,发现某院对药师化疗职业防护方面的缺点和不足。方法:应用《医护人员化疗职业防护状况调查表》,采用随机数表法从静脉药物调配中心(静配组,PIVAS)药师和门急诊输液中心(输液组,OUIVA)药师中各随机抽取30名接触化疗药物的药剂师作为研究对象进行问卷调查。调查问卷的主要内容包括:调查对象的基本情况、药物冲配室防护条件、药师防护状况、药师培训状况等。对两组药师问卷回答情况进行统计分析。结果:整体上药师对化疗药物危害及防护措施认识较差。静配组在使用防护用具及采取防护措施等多个方面明显优于输液组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论:药师对化疗药物的危害、危害途径认识不足,对化疗职业防护措施执行率较低,医院没有健全的防护制度和充足的防护设备。
OBJECTIVE: To compare and analyze the occupational protection status of two groups of pharmacists in chemotherapy and find out the shortcomings and deficiencies in the occupational protection of pharmacists and chemists in a hospital. Methods: A questionnaire on occupational protection status of medical staff in chemotherapy was applied. A random number table was used to select 30 randomly selected pharmacists from intravenous drug distribution center (PIVAS) pharmacists and outpatient and emergency department infusion centers (infusion group, OUIVA) Pharmacists exposed to chemotherapeutic drugs were surveyed as subjects. The main contents of the questionnaire include: the basic conditions of the respondents, protective conditions of drug distribution room, pharmacist protection, pharmacist training and so on. The two groups of pharmacists questionnaire for statistical analysis. Results: On the whole, the pharmacists knew little about the harm of the chemotherapy drugs and protective measures. Static group in the use of protective equipment and take protective measures and other aspects was significantly better than the infusion group, the difference was statistically significant (P <0.05). Conclusion: Pharmacists do not know enough about the harm and harm of chemotherapeutic drugs, the implementation rate of occupational protection measures for chemotherapy is low, the hospital does not have a sound protective system and sufficient protective equipment.