[Long-Term Implementation of Structures and Activities Needed for Health Promotion]. / Was fördert die Verstetigung von Strukturen und Angeboten der Gesundheitsförderung?

To achieve sustainable effects of health promotion interventions, first of all, long-term implementation is needed. However, there are just a few studies that explore how to maintain health-promoting structures and activities after external funding comes to an end. Using a mixed-methods approach, the evaluation study of the Bielefeld University analysed long-term implementation of government-funded projects. Our results show that maintenance of project structures and activities is a multiplex and contextual process. Apart from conceptual factors that can be influenced by project activities, interviewees reported on contextual factors (e. g., political support) that particularly affect successful long-term implementation. Thus, strategies need to be planned and initiated in the early stages of a project.

Hardiness: a review of theory and research.

Although a large body of research on hardiness (a personality construct with dimensions of commitment, control, and challenge) has accumulated, several fundamental issues remain unresolved. Although there are several hardiness scales, the properties of these scales have not been compared. There is debate as to whether hardiness is one or several characteristics. Research studying the pathways through which hardiness exerts its effects has not been comprehensively evaluated. Whereas critics have argued that hardiness does not buffer stress, others have suggested that hardiness buffers for working adults, for males, and in prospective analyses. There is also growing concern that hardiness is related to neuroticism. A review of the literature supports the following conclusions: The Dispositional Resilience Scale (DRS) has several advantages over alternative scales; DRS items form three factors that are consistent with hardiness theory; hardiness dimensions generally show low to moderate intercorrelations; the most common way of categorizing subjects as high or low in hardiness is not consistent with hardiness theory; hardiness does not buffer stress, and it does not buffer stress for working adults, for males, or in prospective analyses; both old and new hardiness scales inadvertently measure neuroticism. Recommendations for future research are provided.

Interviewer style, type A behavior, and cardiovascular response.

The present study assessed whether Type A ratings obtained through different styles of administering the structured interview (SI) differed in their relation to cardiovascular reactivity and questionnaire measures of Type A. Seventy-four male subjects were administered the SI in either a fast, interruptive style or a slower, less disruptive style. Subjects' blood pressure and pulse rate responses to a mirror-tracing and a memory-for-digits task were measured, and subjects also completed the Framingham Type A Scale (FTAS) and the Jenkins Activity Survey (JAS). Increases in diastolic blood pressure in response to the tasks and scores from the FTAS were positively related to Type A ratings obtained from slower interviews; they tended to be negatively related to Type A ratings obtained from fast, interruptive interviews. These results support the notion that style of administering the SI may influence prediction by Type A ratings of cardiovascular end-points, including CHD.