本文選題：男男性行為人群　切入點：動機訪談　出處：《中南大學》2014年碩士論文　論文類型：學位論文

【摘要】：目的探討動機訪談(Motivational Interviewing)干預模式在男男性行為人群(men who have sex with men, MSM)高危性行為干預應用中的可行性和適用性；評價動機訪談對提高MSM人群HIV相關知識、改變HIV相關態(tài)度、提高安全套使用率及主動進行HIV檢測率的效果。 方法采用隨機對照實驗性研究,選取最近3個月有過高危性行為的MSM80例,隨機分為對照組和干預組,每組各40例,對照組只接受同志社區(qū)的常規(guī)健康促進措施和同伴教育員的社區(qū)外展干預；干預組在此基礎上接受由訪談員開展的動機訪談,3個月內完成3次訪談,每次訪談時間40～90分鐘左右。在干預前后對2組研究對象HIV相關知識態(tài)度、安全套使用頻率、HIV相關檢測率進行評價。資料收集采用問卷調查法,工具包括一般情況問卷、HIV基本知識認知問卷、性行為問卷及HIV相關檢測問卷。 結果干預后65人完成隨訪,對照組29人,干預組36人,隨訪期間失訪15人。 (1)干預后對照組平均知曉率提高(x2=3.507,P=0.042),干預組平均知曉率也提高(x2=3.429,P=0.044),但組間比較無明顯差異(x2=0.011,P=0.918),2組在對“感染了HIV可以像慢性病人一樣生活”(x2=3.753,P=0.047)和“感染了HIV就意味著死亡”(x2=3.837,P=0.048)2項的態(tài)度上有差異； (2)干預后干預組肛交安全套使用頻率顯著高于對照組(Z=-3.436,P=0.001)；組內比較,干預組干預后使用頻率增加明顯(Z=-2.253,P=0.024)。 (3)干預后2組口交安全套使用頻率無明顯差異(Z=-0.881,P=0.379),組內比較,對照組干預前后使用頻率無明顯差異(Z=-1.491,P=0.136),干預組亦無明顯差異(Z=-1.132,P=0.257)； (4)干預后2組“知曉本人檢測結果率”均提高(對照組：x2=3.725,P=0.047,干預組：x2=7.784,P=0.005)但無明顯差異(x2=1.342,P=0.218)；干預后2組“主動檢測率”無明顯差異(x2=2.495,P=0.121)。 結論(1)動機訪談干預可改善MSM人群對于HIV相關的認知與態(tài)度。 (2)動機訪談干預可提高MSM人群發(fā)生同性行為時肛交安全套的使用率。 (3)動機訪談干預可提高MSM人群對自身感染HIV狀態(tài)的關注。 (4)動機訪談干預模式在男男性行為人群高危性行為干預中具有可行性。
[Abstract]:Objective to explore the feasibility and applicability of motivational interviewing-based intervention model in the use of high risk sexual behavior intervention in men who have sex with (MSMM), and to evaluate the effect of motivation interview on improving HIV knowledge and changing HIV related attitude in MSM population. The effect of increasing condom use rate and active HIV detection rate. Methods A randomized controlled experimental study was conducted to select MSM80 patients who had had high-risk sexual behaviors in the last 3 months and were randomly divided into control group and intervention group with 40 cases in each group. The control group received only routine health promotion measures from gay communities and community outreach interventions of peer educators, and the intervention group received motivational interviews conducted by interviewees on this basis, and completed 3 interviews within 3 months. The time of each interview was 40 minutes or 90 minutes. Before and after the intervention, the knowledge attitude, condom use frequency and HIV-related testing rate of the two groups were evaluated. The data were collected by questionnaire. The tools include the general information questionnaire, the sexual behavior questionnaire and the HIV related questionnaire. Results 65 cases were followed up after intervention, 29 cases in control group, 36 cases in intervention group, and 15 cases lost visit during follow-up. 1) the average awareness rate of the control group was increased after intervention, and the average awareness rate of the intervention group was also increased, and the average awareness rate of the intervention group was also increased, but there was no significant difference between the two groups, but there was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of "infected HIV can live like a person with chronic diseases" and "infection with HIV means death." There were differences in attitude between 3.837 and 0.048. 2) the frequency of condom use in the intervention group was significantly higher than that in the control group. 3) there was no significant difference in the frequency of condom use between the two groups after intervention. There was no significant difference in the frequency of condom use between the two groups before and after intervention. There was no significant difference between the control group and the control group before and after intervention. There was no significant difference in the frequency of condom use between the two groups before and after intervention, and there was no significant difference between the intervention group and the intervention group. (4) after intervention, the rate of "knowing the test result" in the two groups was increased (control group: x2x2x3.725mPn 0.047, the intervention group: x2x2784, P0. 005), but there was no significant difference between the two groups in the rate of "active detection" (x22.495Pu 0.121) after the intervention, but there was no significant difference between the two groups in the rate of "active detection" (x22.495P0. 121g) after the intervention, there was no significant difference in the rate of "positive detection" between the two groups. Conclusion 1) the intervention of motivation interview can improve the cognition and attitude about HIV in MSM population. 2) the intervention of motivation interview can increase the use rate of anal sex condom in MSM population. 3) the intervention of motivation interview can increase the attention of MSM population to the status of HIV infection. 4) the intervention model of motivational interview is feasible in the intervention of high risk sexual behavior of MSM.
【學位授予單位】：中南大學
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2014
【分類號】：R512.91

【參考文獻】

相關期刊論文 前10條

1 計國平;徐杰;李曉靜;何建剛;;安徽省男男性行為人群艾滋病知識知曉率及其相關因素分析[J];中華疾病控制雜志;2011年07期

2 王毅;徐杰;李志軍;張光貴;李六林;樊靜;;男男性行為者安全套使用及影響因素分析[J];中華疾病控制雜志;2012年02期

3 譚京廣;蔡文德;陳琳;石向東;王曉輝;;深圳市MSM人群不使用安全套原因調查[J];內蒙古醫(yī)學雜志;2009年06期

4 李現(xiàn)紅;王紅紅;何國平;趙俊仕;;男男性行為人群艾滋病防治策略研究進展[J];護理研究;2012年24期

5 巫海娣;崔焱;胡艷;王潔;婁青林;莫永珍;;動機訪談技術對2型糖尿病病人胰島素筆注射行為改變的影響[J];護理研究;2013年22期

6 張北川,劉殿昌,李秀芳,胡鐵中;中國大陸男同性性接觸者的艾滋病高危行為及影響因素研究(一)[J];中國艾滋病性病;2001年01期

7 曲書泉,張大鵬,朱昊,鄭錫文,吳玉華;東北某地男同性戀者性行為及HIV感染流行病學研究[J];中國艾滋病性病;2002年03期

8 張洪波;吳尊友;徐杰;朱軍禮;鄭迎軍;王君;許娟;;中國既往男男性行為人群艾滋病干預模式[J];中國艾滋病性病;2009年01期

9 劉少礎;陳琳;蔡文德;趙錦;譚京廣;張燕;甘永霞;程錦泉;尹平;;深圳市MSM艾滋病知識與預防艾滋病服務調查[J];中國艾滋病性病;2011年01期

10 戴志澄;艾滋病的流行狀況及預防控制[J];中華護理雜志;2005年07期

，

本文編號：1594278