Chinese Journal of Vector Biology and Control ›› 2023, Vol. 34 ›› Issue (3): 400-405.DOI: 10.11853/j.issn.1003.8280.2023.03.020

• Investigation • Previous Articles     Next Articles

Results of disease control institutions in the first Zhejiang vocational skill competition for vector control and demand for team building

GAO Yi1,2, MAO Yi-ping1, WANG Xiao-lin1,2, CHEN Yi-nan1, ZHANG Xin-wei2, GONG Zhen-yu3   

  1. 1. Zhejiang Patriotic Health Development Center, Hangzhou, Zhejiang 310006, China;
    2. Zhejiang Province Pest Control Scientific Association, Hangzhou, Zhejiang 310002, China;
    3. Department of Infectious Control and Prevention, Zhejiang Provincial Center for Disease Control and Prevention, Hangzhou, Zhejiang 310051, China
  • Received:2022-12-10 Online:2023-06-20 Published:2023-06-16

浙江省首届病媒生物防制职业技能竞赛疾控机构成绩及队伍建设需求分析

高奕1,2, 毛一萍1, 王晓林1,2, 陈熠楠1, 张新卫2, 龚震宇3   

  1. 1. 浙江省爱国卫生发展中心, 浙江 杭州 310006;
    2. 浙江省除四害科技协会, 浙江 杭州 310002;
    3. 浙江省疾病预防控制中心传染病防制所, 浙江 杭州 310051
  • 通讯作者: 龚震宇,E-mail:zhygong@cdc.zj.cn
  • 作者简介:高奕,男,主任医师,先后从事疾病预防控制、公共卫生管理、爱国卫生管理和健康浙江建设研究工作,E-mail:gy4966@sina.com

Abstract: Objective To analyze the theoretical knowledge, on-site disposal, and comprehensive analysis capacity for vector control in professional technicians in Zhejiang disease control and prevention (disease control) institutions, China, and to provide a decision-making basis for strengthening the capacity building of teams in disease control institutions.Methods Based on the first Zhejiang vocational skill competition for vector control in 2019, the knowledge of vector control, average score, and loss of points in individual item in 36 contestants from eleven municipal and one provincial disease control institutions were evaluated, and the differences in scores in different regions, different competition subjects, different knowledge categories, theoretical knowledge, and on-site operation were analyzed. SPSS 25.0 was used for difference comparison and variance analysis.Results The results were converted and standardized according to 100 points. The average score of 12 teams was 75.01 (68.13-88.77) points. The analysis of five different subjects of theory test, knowledge quiz, specimen identification, monitoring technique, and device operation showed significant differences in the scores between the theory test and the other four subjects and between the knowledge quiz and the other four subjects (all P<0.05). There were significant differences in individual scores between the contestants with different job types (full-time and part-time) and between those from institutions with different structures and personnel allocations (F=11.897, P=0.002; F=14.737, P=0.001; F=10.627, P=0.003). The analysis of theory test and knowledge quiz according to different knowledge categories showed significant differences in the scores between drug and device use and the other three knowledge categories, and between comprehensive analysis and the other three knowledge categories in the theory test (all P<0.05); for the knowledge quiz, there were significant differences in the scores between the basic knowledge and monitoring evaluation, between the basic knowledge and disposal technique, between species identification and monitoring evaluation, between species identification and disposal technique, between monitoring evaluation and drug and device use, and between drug and device use and disposal technique (all P<0.05). The species identification showed that there were significant differences in the scores between mosquito feature description and the other three key assessment points, and between cockroach or fly feature description and the other three key assessment points (all P<0.05). There were significant differences in the scores between rodent monitoring records and the other key assessment points, and between fly monitoring records and the other key assessment points (all P<0.05). In the device operation subject, significant differences were observed in the scores between drug liquid preparation and personal protection, between drug liquid preparation and post-treatment, and between actual operation and post-treatment (all P<0.05).Conclusions The competition shows that the professional technicians from Zhejiang province’s disease control institutions are generally at a high level. However, there are still insufficient knowledge coverage of the contestants, certain differences in the mastery degree between regions. The vector control teams construction are weakened in the disease control institutions. There are shortcomings and weaknesses in some knowledge categories, especially species identification, basic knowledge, and drug and device use. It suggests that it is necessary to strengthen the systematic training of professionals, highlight basic knowledge and skills training such as on-site operation, and strengthen the construction of internal teams and personnel allocation, so as to improve the overall level of vector prevention and control in Zhejiang province.

Key words: Disease prevention and control institutions, Vector biological control, Skill competition, Team building, Demand analysis

摘要: 目的 了解浙江省疾病预防控制(疾控)机构专业技术人员病媒生物防制理论知识、现场处置和综合分析能力,为加强疾控机构队伍能力建设提供决策依据。方法 以2019年浙江省首届病媒生物防制职业技能竞赛为基础素材,了解11个地市和省级疾控机构36名参赛选手病媒生物防制知识掌握情况,考核平均得分和单项失分情况,分析不同地区、不同竞赛环节科目、不同知识类别、理论知识与现场操作得分差异。使用SPSS 25.0软件进行差异比较、方差分析等处理。结果 按100分换算标化,12支参赛队伍平均成绩为75.01分,最高88.77分,最低68.13分。按理论考试、知识竞答、标本鉴定、监测技术和器械操作5个不同科目分析,理论考试科目与其他4个科目、知识竞答科目与其他4个科目得分差异有统计学意义(均P<0.05)。来自机构设置、人员配备不同的机构和工作性质(专、兼职)不同的选手个人得分差异有统计学意义(F=11.897,P=0.002;F=14.737,P=0.001;F=10.627,P=0.003)。分别对理论考试和知识竞答按不同知识类别分析,理论考试的药械使用、综合分析与其他3种知识类别得分差异均有统计学意义(均P<0.05),知识竞答的基础知识与监测评价和处置技术,虫种鉴定与监测评价和处置技术,监测评价与药械使用,药械使用与处置技术等差异均有统计学意义(均P<0.05)。虫种鉴定的蚊特征描述、蜚蠊或蝇特征描述与其他3个考核要点得分差异均有统计学意义(均P<0.05),监测鼠类和监测蝇类的记录与其他考核要点得分差异均有统计学意义(均P<0.05)。器械操作科目的药液配置与个人防护和事后处理,实际操作与事后处理的差异均有统计学意义(均P<0.05)。结论 竞赛结果显示,浙江省疾控机构专业技术人员总体具有较高水准,但仍然存在参赛选手知识覆盖面不足,地区之间掌握程度存在差异,疾控中心内设机构病媒队伍建设弱化,部分知识类别尤其是虫种鉴定、基础知识、药械使用等是短板和弱项。提示需要加强专业人员系统培训,突出基础知识、现场实操等技能培养,同时强化内设机构建设和人员配备,整体提高浙江省病媒生物防控能力水平。

关键词: 疾病预防控制机构, 病媒生物防制, 技能竞赛, 队伍建设, 需求分析

CLC Number: