环卫作业场所病媒生物防制现状调查分析  

Survey and analysis of the current situation of sanitary pest control in sanitation workplaces

作　　者：刘才兄 张海兵 冷培恩[2] 刘洪霞[2] 易可华 胡屹 戈斌[1] 杨桃 刘清 LIU Caixiong;ZHANG Haibing;LENG Peien;LIU hongxia;YI Kehua;HU Yi;GE Bin;YANG Tao;LIU Qing(Center for Disease Control and Prevention of Fengxian,Shanghai 201499,China;Center for Disease Control and Prevention of Shanghai,Shanghai 201400,China;Department of Epidemiology,School of Public Health,Fudan University,Shanghai 200032,China)

机构地区：[1]上海市奉贤区疾病预防控制中心,上海201499 [2]上海市疾病预防控制中心,上海200336 [3]复旦大学公共卫生学院流行病学教研室,上海200032

出　　处：《中华卫生杀虫药械》2024年第2期122-126,共5页Chinese Journal of Hygienic Insecticides and Equipments

基　　金：上海市奉贤区社会类科技发展基金项目(奉科20221309);上海市加强公共卫生体系建设三年行动计划(2023—2025年)重点学科(GWⅥ-11.1-13);上海市奉贤区社会类科技发展基金项目(奉科20211826)。

摘　　要：目的了解国内不同省市环卫作业场所病媒生物防制现状,为制定环卫作业场所病媒生物防制技术指南提供数据支持。方法采用横断面研究,对国内不同省市病媒生物防制相关人员开展2次线上问卷调查,初次调查基本信息、垃圾处置点配置情况及存在问题。再次调查相关人员对防制指标的认可度。结果初次调查回收有效问卷75份,人员来自17省30个市/区。行业分布前3位分别为PCO公司(5467%)、环卫企业(1867%)、环卫协会(533%);对象所在地区人口规模在50万以下、50万~100万、100万~150万、150万以上分别占293%、267%、120%、320%。667%、373%和587%的人员将干垃圾、湿垃圾和末端处置点分别称为中转站、厨余垃圾处理站和填埋场。不同人口规模的市/区设置干垃圾处置点、湿垃圾处置点、末端处置点数量不同。各省环卫作业场所病媒生物以蝇侵害为主(867%),目前在防制方面存在的问题是“病媒生物无法有效控制”和“参考标准不明确”。有573%的人员认为其所在市/区在防制措施方面严格执行垃圾分类,有307%的人员未关注所在市/区是否进行虫害/鼠害监测,有520%的人员认为垃圾转运车每日进行消毒并安装了除臭装置,533%的人员认为环卫场所有防蝇措施。再次调查回收有效问卷812份,对象来自国内13省28个市/区。85%~96%的病媒生物防制人员(PCO人员)和96%~99%的环卫行业人员和其他病媒生物防制人员认为目前使用的病媒生物控制指标是合理的。3类职业人员对居民区垃圾箱房、填埋场等场所内的蚊、蝇、鼠、蟑指标是否合理的认可度有显著性差异(P<005)。上海市与其他省份人员对其他环卫作业场所的鼠迹≤1处/自然间这一指标是否合理的认可度无显著性差异,但对其他场所的指标是否合理的认可度有显著性差异(P<005)。结论环卫作业场所的功能和数量在不断更新,国内病媒生物防�Objective To comprehensively assess the current status of pest control in refuse disposal site by vector control personnel from across the country,and provide valuable data to support guidelines for the prevention and control of pests in sanitary workplaces Methods A cross-sectional study was conducted with two online questionnaires targeting vector control personnel.The first survey focused on gathering basic information,the configuration of the waste disposal site,and vector control issues.The second survey aimed to assess respondents’acceptance of vector control indicators.The Pearson chi-square test was used to compare the differences in the recognition of vector control personnel from different provinces and cities Results 75%valid questionnaires were collected from 30 cities in 17 provinces.667%of respondents identified dry waste disposal sites as waste transfer stations,while wet garbage disposal sites and final disposal sites were identified as kitchen waste dumps(373%)and landfills(587%),respectively.In cities with a population between 500000 and 15 million inhabitants,there are 1 to 25 dry waste disposal sites,1 to 5 wet waste disposal sites and 1 to 3 final disposal sites per city surveyed.867%of respondents considered fly infestation to be a major hazard in waste disposal in all provinces.Currently,the problem with vector control is that the pest cannot be effectively controlled and the reference standard is not clear.573%of respondents believe that waste separation is strictly enforced.307%of respondents were not sure if their government conducts regular monitoring for pests.520%of respondents stated that rubbish trucks are disinfected and deodorized daily,while 533%of respondents believed that fly control measures are implemented at waste dumpsites.A total of 812 valid questionnaires were collected from 28 cities in 13 provinces.Between 85%and 96%of pest control organization(PCO)staff and between 96%and 99%of waste disposal sites and other vector control staff believed that current pest control in

关 键 词：病媒生物 环卫作业场所 现状调查 

分 类 号：R184.3[医药卫生—流行病学] R126.4[医药卫生—公共卫生与预防医学]