| 521 | 2 | 293 |
| 下载次数 | 被引频次 | 阅读次数 |
目的 了解武陵山区青少年危害健康行为聚集风险的城乡差异。方法 于2023年3—5月，采用多阶段分层随机整群抽样法在武陵山区抽取8个县(区)32所中学的初一至初三、高一至高三年级7901名青少年作为调查对象，调查对象年龄(14.82±1.50)岁；男生4047人(51.22%),女生3854人(48.78%);初中5126人(64.88%),高中2775人(35.12%);农村2513人(31.81%),城市5388人(68.19%)。采用《武陵山区青少年危害健康行为调查问卷》对青少年的偏食、吸烟、饮酒等9种危害健康行为进行问卷调查。城乡青少年危害健康行为及其多元聚集发生率的差异性检验采用χ2检验，并计算相对危险度(RR值)和实际预期比(O/E值)。结果 青少年危害健康行为二元至五元聚集发生率农村均低于城市(χ2值分别为60.73、34.97、16.89和9.14,P<0.05);农村青少年饮酒行为RR值最大(18.02),城市青少年失眠行为RR值最大(15.05)。二元聚集模式农村与城市青少年“吸烟+饮酒”O/E值均最大(农村为8.18,城市为6.14);三元聚集模式农村与城市青少年“吸烟+饮酒+打架”O/E值均最大(农村为28.41,城市为18.15);四元聚集模式农村青少年“吸烟+饮酒+失眠+遭受校园欺凌”O/E值最大(95.10),城市青少年“吸烟+饮酒+打架+遭受校园欺凌”O/E值最大(42.97);五元聚集模式农村与城市青少年“吸烟+饮酒+打架+失眠+遭受校园欺凌”O/E值均最大(农村为309.57,城市为129.28)。结论 武陵山区城市青少年比农村青少年危害健康行为更易聚集，危害健康行为及其多元聚集模式的聚集风险存在城乡差异。
Abstract：OBJECTIVE Understanding urban-rural differences in the risk of aggregation of adolescents' health-risk behaviors in the Wuling Mountain Area.METHODS From March to May 2023, 7901 adolescents from junior to junior high school and senior high school grades in 32 middle schools in 8 counties(districts) in the Wuling Mountain Area were selected as survey respondents using the multi-stage stratified random cluster sampling method, with the age of the survey respondents being(14.82±1.50) years old. There were 4047 male students(51.22%) and 3854 female students(48.78%), 5126(64.88%) in junior high school and 2775(35.12%) in senior high school. 2513(31.81%) in rural schools and 5388(68.19%) in urban schools. The Questionnaire on Health Risky Behaviors of Youth in Wuling Mountain Area was used to investigate 9 health risky behaviors of youth, such as partial feeding, smoking, and drinking alcohol. The χ2 test was used to test the difference between urban and rural adolescents' risky health behaviors and their multivariate aggregation incidence rates, and to calculate the relative risk(RR) and the actual expected ratio(O/E).RESULTS The incidence of bivariate to quintivariate cluster of adolescent health-risk behaviors was lower in all rural schools than in urban schools(χ2 were 60.73, 34.97, 16.89, and 9.14, P<0.05). Rural school adolescents had the highest RR value for alcohol consumption behavior(18.02), while urban school adolescents had the highest RR value for insomnia behavior(15.05). In the bivariate cluster model, the O/E values for “smoking+alcohol consumption” were highest in both rural(8.18) and urban(6.14) school adolescents. In the trivariate cluster model, the O/E values for “smoking+alcohol consumption+fighting” were highest in both rural(28.41) and urban(18.15) school adolescents. In the quadrivariate cluster model, the O/E values for “smoking+alcohol consumption+insomnia+experiencing school bullying” were highest in rural school adolescents(95.10), while the O/E values for “smoking+alcohol consumption+fighting+experiencing school bullying” were highest in urban school adolescents(42.97). In the quintivariate cluster model, the O/E values for “smoking+alcohol consumption+fighting+insomnia+experiencing school bullying” were highest in both rural(309.57) and urban(129.28) school adolescents.CONCLUSION Adolescents in urban schools in the Wuling Mountain Area are more prone to clustering harmful health behaviors compared to those in rural schools, and there are differences in the clustering risks of harmful health behaviors and their diverse clustering patterns between urban and rural areas.
[1] 季成叶.青少年健康危险行为[J].中国学校卫生，2007,28(4):289-291.
[2] 陈雨媚，刘慧铭，梁珊，等.长沙市城区中学生的危险行为及其聚集性分析[J].中国心理卫生杂志，2019,33(8):612-617.
[3] MA J,BETTS N M,HAMPL J S.Clustering of lifestyle behaviors:the relationship between cigarette smoking,alcohol consumption,and dietary intake[J].Am J Health Promot,2000,15(2):107-117.
[4] CHIOLERO A,WIETLISBACH V,RUFFIEUX C,et al.Clustering of risk behaviors with cigarette consumption:a population-based survey[J].Prev Med,2006,42(5):348-353.
[5] 张福兰，张天成，熊静梅，等.2014年湘西州农村土家族和苗族中学生健康危险行为聚集模式的性别差异[J].卫生研究，2017,46(5):767-771.
[6] 徐涛，张天成，张福兰.湘西州农村初中生健康危险行为聚集特征及多发特点分析[J].中国慢性病预防与控制，2021,29(12):892-897.
[7] 徐涛，张天成，周县委，等.湘西州土家族与苗族初中生健康危险行为多发特点及影响因素分析[J].现代预防医学，2021,48(9):1658-1661.
[8] 贾至慧，陈飞宇，李旭阳，等.江西省农村中小学生健康危险行为共发性及关联性[J].中国公共卫生，2022,38(1):29-32.
[9] 石雄辉.吉首市初中生健康危险行为现状及影响因素研究[D].湘西：吉首大学，2020.
[10] 张福兰，张天成，熊静梅，等.湘西州土家族与苗族中学生吸烟和饮酒行为及影响因素分析[J].卫生研究，2015,44(5):750-755.
[11] 熊静梅，张亮，张福兰，等.凤凰县城乡中学生健康危险行为比较分析[J].现代预防医学，2016,43(8):1401-1404.
[12] 季成叶.中国青少年健康相关/危险行为调查综合报告2005[M].北京：北京大学医学出版社，2007:38-43.
[13] 孙晓艳，李怡雪，余灿清，等.中文版抑郁量表信效度研究的系统综述[J].中华流行病学杂志，2017,38(1):110-116.
[14] 黄海，牛露颖，周春燕，等.手机依赖指数中文版在大学生中的信效度检验[J].中国临床心理学杂志，2014,22(5):835-838.
[15] 韩红，程南华.儿童问题行为共发性研究进展[J].中国学校卫生，2020,41(7):1116-1120.
[16] VAN DEN BUSSCHE H,KOLLER D,KOLONKO T,et al.Which chronic diseases and disease combinations are specific to multimorbidity in the elderly?Results of a claims data based cross-sectional study in Germany[J].BMC Public Health,2011,11(1):101.
[17] 范长义，周成超，黄天资，等.山东地区铁路职工慢性病共病模式及相关性研究[J].中国慢性病预防与控制，2021,29(11):851-852.
[18] 张冉，路云，张闪闪，等.中国老年人慢性病共病患病模式及疾病相关性分析[J].中国公共卫生，2019,35(8):1003-1005.
[19] 汤建军，郝加虎，韩慧，等.蚌埠市中学生手机使用依赖与伤害发生的关系[J].中国学校卫生，2016,37(2):208-211.
[20] 刘福荣，宋晓琴，尚小平，等.中学生抑郁症状检出率的meta分析[J].中国心理卫生杂志，2020,34(2):123-128.
[21] 武海潭，干敏雷，尹小俭，等.青少年体力活动与抑郁症状的相关性[J].中国学校卫生，2023,44(5):672-676.
[22] 张天成，张福兰，熊静梅.2016年武陵山区侗族与白族农村青少年健康危险行为及影响因素[J].卫生研究，2018,47(5):782-788.
[23] SVENSSON R,JOHNSON B.Internet use and adolescent drinking:does it matter what young people do online?[J].Drug Alcohol Depend,2020,213(16):108138.
[24] 归冰，何影，卢葳，等.青少年饮酒与自伤行为关系[J].中国学校卫生，2021,42(7):1052-1055.
[25] 蒋俊杰，王旭，喻婧，等.教师关怀行为对中学生学业压力的影响：睡眠质量的中介作用和生命意义感的调节作用[J].心理与行为研究，2023,21(2):260-265.
[26] 冯永辉，彭运石.青少年压力与吸烟行为的关系：人格与性别的调节作用[J].心理与行为研究，2017,15(5):697-701.
[27] 张金健，陈红.江苏高校大学生学业压力与网络成瘾的追踪研究[J].中国学校卫生，2022,43(4):574-577.
[28] 张芳华，崔艳芳，李付伟，等.压力与青少年外化问题行为：社会支持的中介作用[J].中国健康心理学杂志，2021,29(12):1883-1887.
基本信息:
DOI：10.19813/j.cnki.weishengyanjiu.2024.05.003
中图分类号:R179
引用信息:
[1]徐涛,余静,雷丽,等.武陵山区青少年危害健康行为聚集风险的城乡差异[J].卫生研究,2024,53(05):701-707.DOI:10.19813/j.cnki.weishengyanjiu.2024.05.003.
基金信息:
国家社科基金青年项目(No.22CTY007)
2023-01-14
2023
2024-06-18
2024
2
2024-09-05
2024-09-05