农村儿童事故倾性的现况及影响因素的研究

Incidence of accident proneness and its influencing factors in rural children

摘要:

目的 研究农村儿童事故倾性发生的现况,并探讨其影响因素,为农村儿童事故倾性的预防及干预提供科学依据.方法 按随机整群抽样的方法,采用自制的一般情况调查表和伤害调查表对湖南省某农村1 560名儿童进行问卷调查.采用非条件多因素logistic回归分析探讨事故倾性发生的主要危险因素.结果 共筛查出事故倾性儿童147例,事故倾性的发生率为9.42%.单因素分析结果显示儿童性别(P<0.01)、学习成绩(P<0.01)、留守(P<0.05)、家庭类型(P<0.05)、家庭经济状况(P<0.01)及监护人性别(P<0.05)、婚姻状况(P<0.05)、职业(P<0.05)及家庭教育方式(P<0.05)是农村儿童事故倾性的影响因素.多因素logistic回归分析显示,学习成绩中下等(OR=3.683,95%CI:1.028~4.283)、下等(OR=2.099,95%CI:1.587~8.546)、经济状况贫困(OR=2.353,95%CI:1.222~4.533)、教育方式放任或漠不关心(OR=1.914,95%CI:1.029~3.559)和变化无常(OR=4.153,95%CI:1.847~9.338)是儿童事故倾性的危险因素,女孩(OR=0.539,95%CI:0.369~0.788)是儿童事故倾性的保护因素.结论 学习成绩差、家庭经济贫困、教育方式放任或漠不关心和变化无常会增加农村儿童事故倾性的发生;相对于男孩,女孩事故倾性的发生较低.

Abstract:

Objective To investigate the incidence of accident proneness and its influencing factors in rural children. Methods By random cluster sampling, 1 560 children were enrolled from one rural area in Hunan Province, China, and were surveyed with self-designed general and injury questionnaires. Unconditional multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to explore the major risk factors for accident-prone children. Results One hundred and forty-seven accident-prone children were screened out and the incidence of accident proneness was 9.42%. Univariate analysis showed that gender (P<0.01), academic record (P<0.01), left-behind status (P<0.05), family type (P<0.05), family economic status (P<0.01), guardian's gender (P<0.05), guardian's marital status (P<0.05), guardian's occupation (P<0.05), and family educational mode (P<0.05) were influencing factors for accident proneness in rural children. Multivariate logistic regression analysis further revealed that low grade (OR=3.683, 95%CI: 1.028-4.283) and very low grade (OR=2.099, 95% CI: 1.587-8.546) in academic record, poverty in family economic status (OR=2.353, 95% CI: 1.222-4.533), and indulgence or indifference (OR=1.914, 95% CI: 1.029-3.559) and fickleness (OR=4.153, 95% CI: 1.847-9.338) in guardian's educational mode were risk factors for accident proneness in rural children, while female gender (OR=0.539, 95% CI: 0.369-0.788) was a protective factor. Conclusions Low academic record, poor family economy, and incorrect family education mode (indulgence or indifference and fickleness) would increase the incidence of accident proneness in rural children, but girls have less accident proneness than boys.