0
Àá½Ã¸¸ ±â´Ù·Á ÁÖ¼¼¿ä. ·ÎµùÁßÀÔ´Ï´Ù.

º¸°Ç°ü¸®ÀÚ°¡ ÀÎÁöÇÑ ±Ù·ÎÀÚ °Ç°­ÁõÁø ÇÁ·Î±×·¥ ¼öÇà ½ÇÅ¿¡ °üÇÑ ¾÷Á¾º° ºñ±³ : ¿ä±¸µµ, ÇÊ¿äµµ, ¼öÇ൵, Àå¾Öµµ ¹× ¿î¿µÈ¿°ú¸¦ Áß½ÉÀ¸·Î

Comparison of Occupational Health Providers¡¯ Perception on Workers¡¯ Health Promotion Program by Business Types : Focusing on Need, Necessity, Performance, Barriers, and Effectiveness of Program

Çѱ¹Á÷¾÷°Ç°­°£È£ÇÐȸÁö 2016³â 25±Ç 1È£ p.29 ~ 40
KMID : 1003720160250010029
±è¿µÀÓ:Kim Young-Im
À̺¹ÀÓ:Lee Bok-Im

Abstract

Purpose: º» ¿¬±¸´Â ±Ù·ÎÀÚ °Ç°­ÁõÁøÇÁ·Î±×·¥ÀÇ ¿ä±¸µµ, ÇÊ¿äµµ, ¼öÇ൵, Àå¾Öµµ, ¿î¿µÈ¿°ú¸¦ ¾÷Á¾º°·Î ºñ±³ÇÏ°í ±Ù·ÎÀÚ °Ç°­ÁõÁøÇÁ·Î±×·¥ ¿î¿µÈ¿°ú¿¡ ¿µÇâ ¹ÌÄ¡´Â ¿äÀÎÀ» ¾÷Á¾º°·Î ºñ±³ÇÏ´Â °ÍÀ» ¸ñÀûÀ¸·Î ÇÑ´Ù.

Methods: Çѱ¹»ê¾÷°£È£Çùȸ º¸¼ö±³À°¿¡ Âü¿©ÇÑ º¸°Ç°ü¸®ÀÚ¸¦ ´ë»óÀ¸·Î, ÀÀ´äÀÚ ÀÚ±â±âÀÔ¹æ½ÄÀ¸·Î ¼³¹®Á¶»ç¸¦ ½ÃÇàÇÏ¿´´Ù. ¼³¹®Áö´Â ±âÁ¸¹®Çå°íÂûÀ» ÅëÇØ ¿¬±¸Áø¿¡ ÀÇÇØ °³¹ßµÇ¾ú´Âµ¥, ¼¼ºÎÀûÀ¸·Î´Â º¸°Ç°ü¸®ÀÚÀÇ ÀϹÝÀû Ư¼º, »ç¾÷ÀÚÀÇ Æ¯¼º, ±Ù·ÎÀÚ °Ç°­ÁõÁø ÇÁ·Î±×·¥¿¡ ´ëÇÑ ±Ù·ÎÀÚ ¿ä±¸µµ, º¸°Ç°ü¸®ÀÚ°¡ ÀÎÁöÇÑ ÇÊ¿äµµ, ½ÇÁ¦ ¼öÇ൵, Àå¾Öµµ ¹× ¿î¿µÈ¿°ú·Î ±¸¼ºµÇ¾ú´Ù. ÃÖÁ¾Àû ¿¬±¸´ë»ó »ç¾÷ÀåÀº ÃÑ 168°³¼Ò·Î, Á¦Á¶°Ç¼³¾÷ 76°³¼Ò(45.2%), ¼­ºñ½º¾÷ 52°³¼Ò(31.0%), º¸°Ç¾÷ 40°³¼Ò(23.8%)À̾ú´Ù. ºÐ¼®¹æ¹ýÀ¸·Î´Â ¥ö©÷test, ANOVA test, correlation analysis, multiple regression analysis µîÀÌ È°¿ëµÇ¾ú´Ù.

Results: ±Ù·ÎÀÚ °Ç°­ÁõÁø ÇÁ·Î±×·¥ÀÇ ¿ä±¸µµ, ÇÊ¿äµµ, ¼öÇ൵´Â ¾÷Á¾º°·Î Â÷ÀÌ°¡ ÀÖ¾ú´Ù. ±Ù·ÎÀÚ °Ç°­ÁõÁø ÇÁ·Î±×·¥ ¿î¿µÈ¿°ú·Î¼­ ÀÌÁ÷À² °¨¼Ò¿¡ À־ º¸°Ç¾÷¿¡¼­ Åë°èÀûÀ¸·Î À¯ÀÇÇÏ°Ô ³ôÀº Á¡¼ö¸¦ ³ªÅ¸³»¾ú´Ù. ¸¶Áö¸·À¸·Î ±Ù·ÎÀÚ °Ç°­ÁõÁø ÇÁ·Î±×·¥ ¿î¿µÈ¿°ú¿¡ ¿µÇâ ¹ÌÄ¡´Â ¿äÀÎÀ¸·Î, Á¦Á¶?°Ç¼³¾÷Àº ±Ù·ÎÀÚÀÇ ¿ä±¸µµ, ¼­ºñ½º¾÷Àº º¸°Ç°ü¸®ÀÚÀÇ ±Ù¹«°æ·Â, º¸°Ç¾÷Àº º¸°Ç°ü¸®ÀÚ°¡ ÀÎÁöÇÑ ÇÊ¿äµµÀÎ °ÍÀ¸·Î ³ªÅ¸³µ´Ù.

Conclusion: º» ¿¬±¸°á°ú¿¡ ±Ù°ÅÇÏ¿©, È¿°úÀûÀÎ ±Ù·ÎÀÚ °Ç°­ÁõÁø ÇÁ·Î±×·¥ ¿î¿µÀ» À§ÇÏ¿© »ç¾÷Àå ¾÷Á¾º°·Î Â÷º°Àû Àü·«À» »ç¿ëÇÒ °ÍÀ» Á¦¾ÈÇÏ¿´´Ù.

Purpose: The purposes of this study were to examine the differences in need, necessity, performance, barriers, and effectiveness of workers¡¯ health promotion program and to determine the influencing factors in effectiveness of workers¡¯ health promotion program by business types.

Methods: Subjects were participants of an education held by Korean association of occupational health nurses and a survey was self-reported. Survey items were developed by researchers through literature review. It included general characteristics of occupational health providers and worksites, need, necessity, performance, barriers and effectiveness of workers¡¯ health promotion (WHP) program. The total number of worksites was 168, manufacturing/construction was 76 (45.2%), other services were 52 (31.0%), and healthcare services were 40 (23.8%). We used ¥ö©÷test, ANOVA test, correlation analysis, and multiple regression analysis.

Results: There were differences in need, necessity and performance of WHP by business types. In healthcare services, WHP had statistically significant effectiveness to reduce turnover rates. And the influencing factors of WHP¡¯s effectiveness were workers¡¯ need in manufacturing/construction, health provider¡¯s career in other services, and perceived necessity in healthcare services.

Conclusion: Based on this result, we propose differentiated strategies depending on the business types for effective workers¡¯ health promotion program.
KeyWords
±Ù·ÎÀÚ, °Ç°­ÁõÁø, È¿°ú
Workers, Health promotion, Effectiveness
¿ø¹® ¹× ¸µÅ©¾Æ¿ô Á¤º¸
 
µîÀçÀú³Î Á¤º¸
ÇмúÁøÈïÀç´Ü(KCI)