登革熱在臺灣於民國九十一年又爆發大流行,確定病例五千三百四十五名,登革出血熱病例二百四十二名,從中央政府到地方政府各相關單位投入廣大人力及物力資源,對於這些資源投入後民眾對登革熱防治知識、態度及行為改變情形,有必要作深入研究與探討。 本研究主要目的有:一、了解登革熱流行地區民眾對登革熱的認知、態度與行為。二、比較實驗區與對照區居民對登革熱認知、態度與行為的差異,作為防治成效之參考。三、探討影響民眾在登革熱防治工作上認知、態度與行為的相關因素。 本研究使用橫斷性研究,以評估問卷方式收集初級資料(primary data) ,於2003年1月1日至1月14日期間進行家庭問卷訪問工作共取得實驗區(天興里、南成里)、對照區(正義里及善美里)共2217份有效問卷。 本研究結果顯示,實驗區與對照區的的社會人口學特質經統計檢定後並無統計學上顯著差異;性別方面,受訪者以女性居多,平均年齡約42歲,教育程度以高中佔大多數,職業分佈,對照區以家管佔大多數約36.72%,實驗區亦以家管佔大多數,約39.01﹪。社會經濟地位對照區以第一級:半技術、非技術工人及無業佔大多數約56.45%,實驗區亦以第一級佔大多數,約59.94﹪。 從登革熱認知方面探討,對照區平均得分為9.4分與實驗區平均得分為9.3分,經過Z檢定,顯示對照區與實驗區對登革熱的認知並無顯著性差異。登革熱防治態度方面探討,對照區平均得分為39.01分與實驗區平均得分為38.62分經過Z檢定,顯示對照區民眾對登革熱的防治態度較實驗區民眾有較正向的防治態度。實驗區未因比對照區有較多次的衛教介入而有較正向的防治態度,反而對照區民眾對登革熱的防治態度比實驗區正向。91年6月以前對預防病媒蚊叮咬所採取的保護行為,對照區平均得分為13.10,實驗區平均得分為12.78,經Z檢定後有統計學上顯著差異,顯示對照區民眾對預防病媒蚊叮咬所採取的保護行為較實驗區民眾多。91年6月至91年12月登革熱流行期間對照區與實驗區民眾對預防病媒蚊叮咬所採取的保護行為,結果顯示對照區平均得分為13.72,實驗區平均得分為13.57。兩組資料經Z檢定後無統計學上顯著性差異。對登革熱病媒蚊孳生源清除行為,對照區平均得分為31.33,實驗區平均得分為31.29。對照區與實驗區民眾對登革熱病媒蚊孳生源清除行為經Z檢定後有統計上顯著差異,顯示對照區民眾對對登革熱病媒蚊孳生源清除行為較實驗區民眾好。 登革熱防治工作是需要全民參予才能成功,雖然透過各種資訊傳播管道對民眾教育,讓民眾了解到登革熱的危險性及清除孳生源的重要性。不過,還是無法改變民眾的生活習慣及清除居住環境的孳生源。似乎要等到登革熱發生大流行時,大多數的民眾才會養成推動和支持防治登革熱的工作。但是戶外的空地、髒亂點、空屋、公共設施最後仍須依賴政府單位動用大量的行政資源來清理登革熱孳生源,才能將登革熱疫情控制下來。
The dengue fever pandemic in the year of 2002, 5345 were confirmed patients, 242 were dengue hemorrhagic fever. The government support many people, material resources prevent the dengue fever. So, we wanted to future study that person change their acknowledge, attitudes, behavior of the dengue fever prevention by those resources. The purpose of the study: Firstly, understanding the people acknowledge, attitudes and behavior of the dengue fever in epidemic area. Secondly, comparison to the difference among acknowledge, attitudes and behavior between the people of control subjects and experimental subjects, as a reference. Thirdly, we explored the related factors of acknowledge, attitudes and behavior of the prevention dengue fever. This is cross-sectional study. We use estimate questionnaires to collect primary data from January 1 to 14 in 2003. The sample include experimental subjects(Tien-Hsing, Nan-Cheng)and control subjects(Cheng-Yi, Shan-Mei),2217 samples were analyzed. The study result: There were no significant between experimental subjects and control subjects in demographic characteristics. There are more females to respondent the questionnaires than those males. The samples mean age were 42 years old, most subjects education level were senior high school; most occupational status were home keeper(36.72﹪of control subjects and 39.01% of experimental subjects); the socioeconomic status were first grade( semi technology , non-technology) , 56.45% in control subjects and 59.94% in experimental subjects. In acknowledge, mean score were 7.4 in control group and 9.3 in experimental group. There were no significant between control groups and experimental groups. In attitudes of prevention mean score were 39.01 in control groups, with a 38.06 in experimental groups. The control groups had positive attitudes better than those experimental groups by Z test. The experimental groups didn’t change their attitudes by many interventions, but control groups have more positive attitudes than those experimental groups. The prevention from the sting of dengue vector mosquitoes before August in 2002, mean score were 13.01 in control groups and 12.78 in experimental groups. A significant between control groups and experimental groups. From August to December in 2002, the prevention from the sting of dengue vector mosquitoes mean score13.72 in control groups and 13.57 in experimental groups. There were no significant in our study by Z test. The eliminating from dengue vector mosquitoes breeding sites, mean score were 31.33 in control groups and 31.29 in experimental groups. The significant between control groups and experimental groups by Z test. In other words, control groups of the eliminating from dengue vector mosquitoes breeding sites better than those experimental groups. Dengue fever prevention would be successful by all people in Taiwan. Even though the mass medium to people, it can’t change the lifestyles of people to stop the dengue vector mosquitoes breeding sites. Most of people contribute to support the prevention of dengue fever during pandemic. But the epidemic situation couldn’t be under control until the government institutes eliminate overall open and dirty places.