Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
Add more filters











Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
Am J Health Promot ; 32(4): 1095-1109, 2018 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28587471

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To explore published empirical literature in order to identify factors that facilitate or inhibit collaborative approaches for health promotion using a scoping review methodology. DATA SOURCE: A comprehensive search of MEDLINE, CINAHL, ScienceDirect, PsycINFO, and Academic Search Complete for articles published between January 2001 and October 2015 was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. STUDY INCLUSION AND EXCLUSION CRITERIA: To be included studies had to: be an original research article, published in English, involve at least 2 organizations in a health promotion partnership, and identify factors contributing to or constraining the success of an established (or prior) partnership. Studies were excluded if they focused on primary care collaboration or organizations jointly lobbying for a cause. DATA EXTRACTION: Data extraction was completed by 2 members of the author team using a summary chart to extract information relevant to the factors that facilitated or constrained collaboration success. DATA SYNTHESIS: NVivo 10 was used to code article content into the thematic categories identified in the data extraction. RESULTS: Twenty-five studies across 8 countries were identified. Several key factors contributed to collaborative effectiveness, including a shared vision, leadership, member characteristics, organizational commitment, available resources, clear roles/responsibilities, trust/clear communication, and engagement of the target population. CONCLUSION: In general, the findings were consistent with previous reviews; however, additional novel themes did emerge.


Subject(s)
Health Promotion , Interinstitutional Relations , Health Promotion/organization & administration , Humans , Program Evaluation
2.
J Prim Care Community Health ; 7(1): 16-23, 2016 Jan.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26385995

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to examine the impact of a Stop Smoking Before Surgery (SSBS) program in a health authority where responsibility for surgical services is shared by health professionals in regional centers and outlying communities. METHODS: A between-subjects, pre-post mixed method program evaluation was conducted. Elective surgery patients at 2 Northern Canadian hospitals were recruited and surveyed at 2 time points: pre-SSBS implementation (n = 150) and 1 year post-SSBS implementation (n = 90). In addition, semistructured interviews were conducted with a purposeful sample of participants (n = 18). RESULTS: Participants who received information about stopping smoking before surgery post-SSBS implementation were more likely than expected to have reduced their smoking, χ(2)(1, 89) = 10.62, P = .001, and had a significantly higher Awareness of Smoking-Related Perioperative Complications score than those that were advised to quit smoking prior to SSBS implementation (U = 1288.0, P < .001). Being advised by a health care professional was the second strongest predictor of whether or not participants reduced their smoking before surgery post-SSBS implementation. However, there was no significant change in the number of participants who reported being advised to quit smoking before surgery between groups. CONCLUSION: Providing surgery-specific resources to increase awareness of and support for surgery-specific smoking cessation had limited success in this rural context. Additional strategies are needed to ensure that every surgical patient who smokes receives information about the benefits of quitting for surgery and is aware of available cessation resources.


Subject(s)
Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice , Perioperative Care/methods , Perioperative Period/adverse effects , Smoking Cessation/methods , Smoking/adverse effects , Adult , Aged , Canada , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Program Evaluation , Retrospective Studies
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL