臺北市健康職場內健康促進夥伴關係與健康促進品質之相關研究

A Study on the Relationships between Health-Promotion Partnerships and Quality of Health-Promotion in the Workplaces of Taipei City

游麗惠(Li-Hui Yu)

指導教授 ： 鄭惠美

國立臺灣師範大學/教育學院/健康促進與衛生教育學系/博士(2011年)

摘要

本研究之目的在探討職場內健康促進夥伴關係與職場健康促進品質的相關。研究對象為臺北市的116家健康職場，使用自行設計的「職場健康促進品質和職場內健康促進夥伴關係的自我評估問卷」為研究工具，進行調查研究。結果發現：
一、研究對象的職場健康促進品質以健康促進實施層面表現最佳，健康促進評價層面表現最差。得分較高的題目與勞工安全衛生法規相關。
二、研究對象的職場內健康促進夥伴關係以夥伴關係組成和夥伴關係互動等層面的表現較佳，夥伴關係共識、夥伴關係管理和夥伴關係結果等層面的表現較差。
三、研究對象的職場內健康促進夥伴關係之整體表現，相較職場健康促進品質之整體表現為差。
四、研究對象的職場健康促進品質和職場內健康促進夥伴關係之共同影響因素包括：「健康職場認證類別」、「健康促進專責單位設置」、「健康促進專責單位組成跨部門」，「健康促進專責單位組成部門數」、「共同推動健康促進者」、「共同推動健康促進部門數」、「共同推動健康促進人數」等；另外「健康職場認證展延」、「健康促進專責單位開會頻率」亦是職場內健康促進夥伴關係的影響因素。
五、研究對象的職場內健康促進夥伴關係之5個層面，與職場健康促進品質均呈現高度相關。
六、控制研究對象的基本屬性後，組織特性對職場健康促進品質的解釋變異量為47.60%，惟其中無單一有效的解釋變項；控制基本屬性和組織特性後，職場內健康促進夥伴關係分量表得分對職場健康促進品質有顯著的影響，其解釋變異量為19.05%。
七、職場內健康促進夥伴關係中的夥伴關係管理層面，為職場健康促進品質的有效解釋變項，且為正相關。
最後，本研究建議未來可以：(1)研議有利於推動職場健康促進的法規；(2)鼓勵企業設立專責的職場健康促進委員會;(3)加強企業建立職場健康促進夥伴關係的能力;(4)持續精良本研究工具；(5)探討不同夥伴關係測量者與測量結果的差異性；(6)驗證企業的組織特性、職場內外健康促進夥伴關係、職場健康促進品質的因果模式；(7)進行職場健康促進經濟效益之本土化評價研究。

關鍵字

品質 ； 健康促進 ； 夥伴關係 ； 職場健康促進

並列摘要

The purpose of this research is to explore relations between health-promotion partnerships in the workplace and the quality of health-promotion in the workplace. Research subjects were 116 workplaces in Taipei City. A survey questionnaire was developed for the research and from the data collected the following results were found:

1.With regard to quality, research subjects scored highest in the implementation of health promotion and lowest in the evaluation of health promotion. Higher-scoring topics tended to be related to occupational safety regulations.
2.With regard to partnerships, research subjects scored higher in the areas of partnership formation and partnership interaction. Scores in goal alignment, in relationship management, and in partnership results were lower.
3.Overall, research subjects scored better in measures related to the quality of health -promotion than in measures related to partnership.
4.Significant factors that influenced partnership and quality of health-promotion in the subjects included: type of certified healthy workplace, unit responsible for health-promotion, inter-departmental unit responsible for health-promotion or not, number of departments comprising unit responsible for health-promotion, department jointly promoting health, number of departments jointly promoting health, and number of persons jointly promoting health. In addition, application for extension of healthy workplace certification, and the frequency of meetings of the unit responsible for health-promotion were factors found to influence partnership scores significantly.
5.The five facets of partnership in health-promotion in the workplace were highly correlated with the quality of health-promotion in the workplace.
6.After controlling for basic characteristics of the workplaces, organizational features together could explained 47.60% of the variation in quality in health-promotion, though no single feature was statistically significant by itself. After controlling for basic characteristics and organizational features, partnership emerged as a valid explanatory variable with explanatory power at 19.05%.
7.Partnership management in the workplace was positively correlated to the quality of health promotion in the workplace and it was a valid explanatory variable.

Possible future areas of research include: (1) legislation to facilitate health-promotion in the workplace; (2) encourage the establishment of committees in the workplace specifically charged with health promotion; (3) reinforcement of partnerships in health-promotion in the workplace; (4) continued refinement of research questionnaire; (5) exploration of the relationship between the scoring metholds and the score of partnership measures; (6) validation of the causal model of workplace organizational features, health-promotion partnerships, and quality of health-promotion in the workplace; (7) cost-benefit analysis of health-promotion in the workplace in Taiwan.

並列關鍵字

quality ； health promotion ； partnership ； workplace health promotion

參考文獻

行政院衛生署國民健康局(2007)。96年度「健康職場自主認證」推動方案。台北:行政院衛生署國民健康局。

行政院衛生署國民健康局(2008)。97年度「健康職場自主認證」推動方案。台北:行政院衛生署國民健康局。

行政院衛生署國民健康局(2009)。98年度「健康職場自主認證」推動方案。台北:行政院衛生署國民健康局。

吳明隆(2006)。SPSS統計應用學習實務-問卷分析與應用統計。台北：知城數位科技股份有限公司。

林金定、羅慶徽、蔡艷清、羅嘉楓、朱明若(2006)。職場健康促進計畫評估初探。中華職業醫學雜誌，13(1)，1-7。