高级检索
    王心琪, 李旭, 龚淑涵, 齐静, 刘航, 李莉, 韩旭, 葛覃兮, 苏丽琴, 王先良. 2019年全国2134家旅店毛巾清洗效果调查[J]. 环境卫生学杂志, 2022, 12(9): 662-668. DOI: 10.13421/j.cnki.hjwsxzz.2022.09.008
    引用本文: 王心琪, 李旭, 龚淑涵, 齐静, 刘航, 李莉, 韩旭, 葛覃兮, 苏丽琴, 王先良. 2019年全国2134家旅店毛巾清洗效果调查[J]. 环境卫生学杂志, 2022, 12(9): 662-668. DOI: 10.13421/j.cnki.hjwsxzz.2022.09.008
    shu
    WANG Xin-qi, LI Xu, GONG Shu-han, QI Jing, LIU Hang, LI Li, HAN Xu, GE Tan-xi, SU Li-qin, WANG Xian-liang. Investigation on the cleaning efficiency of towels in 2134 hotels in China, 2019[J]. Journal of Environmental Hygiene, 2022, 12(9): 662-668. DOI: 10.13421/j.cnki.hjwsxzz.2022.09.008
    Citation: WANG Xin-qi, LI Xu, GONG Shu-han, QI Jing, LIU Hang, LI Li, HAN Xu, GE Tan-xi, SU Li-qin, WANG Xian-liang. Investigation on the cleaning efficiency of towels in 2134 hotels in China, 2019[J]. Journal of Environmental Hygiene, 2022, 12(9): 662-668. DOI: 10.13421/j.cnki.hjwsxzz.2022.09.008
    shu

    2019年全国2134家旅店毛巾清洗效果调查

    Investigation on the cleaning efficiency of towels in 2134 hotels in China, 2019

      摘要
    • 摘要:
      目的 了解全国宾馆(酒店)毛巾清洗效果(以毛巾pH值作为评价指标)并分析其影响因素。
      方法 采用随机抽样的方法, 于2019年收集全国2134家宾馆(酒店)19436件毛巾样品进行pH值检测, 运用χ2检验和Logistic回归分析影响毛巾pH值合格的因素。
      结果 毛巾样品pH值范围为3.2~13.9, 总合格率为68.38%。pH值低于6.5和高于8.5的样品分别占5.31%和26.31%。东部和西部地区的宾馆(酒店)毛巾pH值合格率较高分别为70.93%和68.67%。三星级及以上宾馆(酒店)毛巾样品pH值合格率最高(69.55%), 快捷酒店最低(67.12%)。Logistic回归分析结果显示, 宾馆(酒店)卫生监督量化未分级和毛巾外送清洗消毒可能会降低毛巾样品pH值合格率, OR(95%CI)值分别为1.21(1.12~1.31)和1.10(1.02~1.18)。
      结论 宾馆(酒店)毛巾pH值合格情况仍有待于进一步提高, 地区、宾馆(酒店)卫生监督量化未分级和外送清洗消毒是影响毛巾pH值合格的因素, 建议加强对宾馆(酒店)毛巾的卫生监督及检测, 加强对洗涤公司的管理。

       

      Abstract:
      Objective To investigate the cleaning efficiency of towels in hotels in China (using the pH value of towels as an evaluation index) and analyze its related influencing factors.
      Methods A total of 19436 towel samples from 2134 hotels in China were collected by random sampling method in 2019 for pH detection. The Chi-square test and Logistic regression analysis were used to analyze the factors influencing the qualified pH value of towels.
      Results The pH value of towel samples ranged from 3.2 to 13.9, and the overall qualified rate was 68.38%. The towel samples with a pH value of below 6.5 accounted for 5.31%, and those with a pH value of above 8.5 accounted for 26.31%. The qualified rates of pH value of towels in hotels in eastern and western regions were 70.93% and 68.67%, respectively. The qualified rate of pH value of towel samples was the highest in hotels graded at the three-star level or above (69.55%), and was the lowest in express hotels (67.12%). The result of Logistic regression analysis showed that a lack of quantitative grading of hygienic supervision in hotels (odds ratioOR = 1.21, 95% confidence intervalCI: 1.12~1.31) and towel cleaning and disinfection by other units (OR = 1.10, 95% CI: 1.02-1.18) might reduce the qualified rate of the pH value of towel samples.
      Conclusion The qualified rate of the pH value of towels in hotels needs to be further improved. A lack of quantitative grading of hygienic supervision in regions and hotels, and towel cleaning and disinfection by other units are influencing factors for the qualified rate of pH value. It is recommended to strengthen the hygienic supervision, detection of hotel towels, and the management of washing companies.

       

      • HTML全文
      • 参考文献(20)
      • 相关文章
      • 施引文献
    • 资源附件(0)

    /

    返回文章
    返回