某地区2012年卫生行政处罚相关研究

发布时间：2018-05-11 04:12

本文选题：卫生行政处罚 + 案卷　；参考：《中南大学》2014年硕士论文

【摘要】：[目的]了解该地区2012年卫生行政处罚中违法行业分布、案件来源等情况,为今后确立公共卫生监督工作重点提供参考依据；对案卷进行评分,分析卫生行政处罚过程中存在的主要问题,提出相应的建议；分析卫生行政处罚案卷质量的影响因素。 [方法]对市级案卷进行系统抽样,对省级的三家单位的案卷进行普查。使用自编的人口学资料问卷对主要承办人进行调查；使用自编的卫生行政处罚案件相关情况问卷对145份案件的信息进行逐一填写；使用根据徐汇区卫生局的《卫生行政处罚案卷质量评价指标体系》制定的《卫生行政处罚质量评分表》和“具体评分方法”对案卷进行评分。采用SPSS17.0统计分析软件和EXCEL对数据进行分析。 [结果]1.在145名案件主要承办人中,男性103(71.03%)人、女性42(28.97%)人；年龄均数为40.03±8.09岁。 2.在145份行政处罚案卷中,违反食品、医疗、公共场所、饮用水、其他五个行业相关卫生法律、法规和规范的分别有44(30.3%)、83(57.2%)、15(10.3%)、1(0.7%)、2(1.4%)份；涉及了30种案由,其中,无医师资格行医,27份(18.62%),是最常见的案由；罚款145份,占100%,是首要的处罚种类；145份案卷均为自觉履行；0例发生行政复议或行政诉讼。 3.145份案卷总得分的范围为68.92～98.85分、得分中位数90.85分、得分均数90.17±4.42分、得分指标为90.17%；在28个三级指标中,A22、B11、B12、B22、C11、C12、C22的得分情况很好,得分指数均为100%、A11、A32和D31的得分情况较差,得分指数在均60%以下、D32的得分指数最低,仅为17%。 4.单因素分析发现,案件主要承办人为男性、46岁以上、县级卫生执法单位、处罚金额在4001～10000内、部分履行的案件质量可能更高。多元线性回归分析显示男性主要承办人的案卷质量较高、年龄较大的主要承办人的案卷质量较高。 [结论]1.无医师资格行医,27份(18.62%),是最常见的案由。 2.卫生行政处罚案卷总得分均数90.17±4.42,总得分指数90.17%,卫生行政处罚案卷质量较好。 3.28个三级指标中,A22、B11、B12、B22、C11、C12、C22,的得分情况很好,得分指数均为100%；D32的得分指数17%,得分情况最差。 4.案件主要承办人的性别、年龄是卫生行政处罚案卷质量的影响因素。图9幅,表11个,参考文献60篇。
[Abstract]:[objective] to find out the distribution of illegal industries and the sources of cases in the health administrative punishment in this area in 2012, to provide a reference basis for establishing the focus of public health supervision in the future, and to score the case files. This paper analyzes the main problems existing in the process of health administrative punishment, puts forward corresponding suggestions, and analyzes the influencing factors on the quality of the file of health administrative punishment. Methods: systematic sampling was carried out on the case files at the city level, and a general survey was carried out on the case files of the three units at the provincial level. The self-compiled demographic information questionnaire was used to investigate the main operators, and the self-compiled questionnaire was used to fill out the information of 145 cases. According to the quality evaluation index system of the health administrative punishment file of Xuhui District Health Bureau, the score table of health administrative punishment quality and the concrete scoring method were used to grade the case file. SPSS17.0 statistical analysis software and EXCEL were used to analyze the data. [result] 1. Of the 145 cases, 103x 71.03 were male and 4228.97 were female, with an average age of 40.03 卤8.09 years. 2. Of the 145 cases of administrative penalties against food, medical treatment, public places, drinking water, and other relevant health laws, regulations and regulations in five other industries, 440.30. 30.3and 57.2were involved in the case of food, medical treatment, public places, drinking water, and the relevant health laws, regulations and norms of the other five industries. Twenty-seven cases of practicing medicine without medical qualifications were the most common cause, and 145 fines, accounting for 100, were the most important types of punishment, and 145 cases were all cases of administrative reconsideration or administrative litigation. The total score of 3.145 case files ranged from 68.92 to 98.85, the median score was 90.85, the average score was 90.17 卤4.42, and the score index was 90.170.The scores of A22B11B11B12B12B22C11C11C12C12C12 and C12C22 were very good, and the scores of A11A32 and D31 were all worse than those of A11A32 and D31. The score index below 60% was the lowest with a score index of 17. 4. Single factor analysis showed that the main person responsible for the case was male over 46 years old, county health law enforcement unit, the amount of punishment was within 4001100.The quality of partially fulfilled cases may be higher. Multiple linear regression analysis showed that the quality of the male main contractor was higher than that of the older one. [conclusion] 1. The most common cause is 27 cases of unqualified medical practitioners. 2. The average score of total score of health administrative punishment file was 90.17 卤4.42, the total score index was 90.17 and the quality of health administrative punishment file was better. 3. The score of A22B11B12B12C11C11C12C12C22 is very good, the score index is 100 / D32's score index 17, the score is the worst. 4. The gender and age of the main person involved in the case are the influencing factors of the quality of the case file of health administrative punishment. There are 9 figures, 11 tables and 60 references.
【学位授予单位】：中南大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：D922.16;D922.11

【参考文献】