ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: This study aims to identify perception, performance, and the related factors of performance in regards to patients' medical information protection among allied health college students. METHODS: Four hundred twelve subjects from three colleges located in Jeonbuk and Kyungbuk province consented to participate. Data was collected from November 28 to December 15, 2012. To assess perception and performance in regards to patients' medical information protection, a self-reporting questionnaire was used. Data was analyzed via SPSS 18.0 program. RESULTS: The score of perception and performance about patients' medical information protection were 4.07 and 3.56, respectively. All item's scores of performance were significantly lower than those of perception. The perception score was significantly different according to recognition of hospital ethics code (t=1.95, p=.052), and recognition of association ethics code (t=2.88, p=.004). The performance score was significantly different according to gender (t=-3.32, p=001), major (F=14.41, p<.001), clinical practicum hospitals (F=8.22, p<.001), and method of electronic medical record access (F=3.23, p=.023). The factors influencing performance were perception(beta=.46, p<.001), duration of clinical practice(beta=-.36, p<.001), and gender(beta=.09, p=.033). CONCLUSION: In order to improve performance in regards to patients' medical information protection of allied health college students, we should develop ethical education programs and standardize them through multidisciplinary collaboration.
Subject(s)
Humans , Codes of Ethics , Computer Security , Confidentiality , Cooperative Behavior , Education , Electronic Health Records , Ethics, Institutional , Medical Records , Students, Public HealthABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: This study aimed to assess the status of infection control during influenza A pandemic (H1N1) 2009. METHODS: A questionnaire survey was conducted in November 2009 at the 100 hospitals designated by the Korea Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (KCDC) as influenza A pandemic (H1N1) 2009-treatment institutions. RESULTS: In 32.3% of the hospitals, the ventilation system of the influenza A pandemic (H1N1) 2009 isolation ward was separated from the hospital's ventilation system. With regard to wearing personal protective equipment while caring for patients with H1N1 infection, during usual patient contact, masks were always worn by all medical staff at all the hospitals; however, medical staff at 38.7% and 51.6% of the hospitals did not wear gloves and gowns, respectively. During aerosol-generating procedures, some medical staff wore surgical masks, whereas medical staff at 10% and 23.3% of the hospitals did not wear gowns and protective goggles, respectively. In all, 64.5% of the hospitals responded that the contents of the guidelines established by the KCDC were insufficient for reference purposes in actual practice. CONCLUSION: Some of influenza A pandemic (H1N1) 2009-treatment institutions are believed to be inadequate in facilities, infection control during patient treatment, and administrative measures among their efforts to prevent transmission in hospital. In preparation against the outbreak of similar diseases in the future, the government needs to establish guidelines highly applicable by medical staff, to secure exclusive spaces and personnel for treating infectious disease patients, and to develop personal protective gear support and management systems.