美国印第安人、阿拉斯加原住民和夏威夷原住民老年人循证健康促进计划的经验和获取途径。

IF 1.6 Q3 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Health Promotion Practice Pub Date : 2025-03-01 Epub Date: 2023-10-10 DOI:10.1177/15248399231201552
R Turner Goins, Collette Adamsen, Becky Bendixen, Melody Woodrich-Fernando, Jennie R Joe, Robin Besse, Kathleen Zuke
{"title":"美国印第安人、阿拉斯加原住民和夏威夷原住民老年人循证健康促进计划的经验和获取途径。","authors":"R Turner Goins, Collette Adamsen, Becky Bendixen, Melody Woodrich-Fernando, Jennie R Joe, Robin Besse, Kathleen Zuke","doi":"10.1177/15248399231201552","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Evidence-based programs (EBPs) work effectively for participants whose characteristics match those of the EBP research participants. However, EBPs have been almost exclusively developed and evaluated for the general U.S. population with limited American Indian, Alaska Native, and Native Hawaiian (AI/AN/NH) community engagement. Thus, an AI/AN/NH Evidence-Based Program Advisory Council sought to identify AI/AN/NH peoples' experiences with and access to EBPs. We held 20 listening sessions with AI/AN/NH Elder services program staff (<u>n</u> = 118) and with AI/AN/NH Elders (<u>n</u> = 82) and conducted a self-administered online survey with Title VI Directors (<u>n</u> = 63). The six themes that emerged from the listening sessions with staff included misunderstanding community engagement, valuing fidelity over flexibility, lack of cultural awareness, assumptions about available infrastructure, unrealistic implementation timelines, and funding restrictions. Listening session themes with Elders included definitions of aging well, participation motivators, preferred activities, participation barriers, and unmet needs. Survey data indicated that programming of greatest interest for Elders as identified by Title VI Directors and staff included and/or addressed cultural activities (81%), socialization (75%), diabetes (73%), caregiving (68%), and nutrition (68%). Seventy-six percent of survey respondents had heard of EBPs and 24% indicated that EBPs were not being implemented in their community. The Advisory Council developed specific action steps with the goal of improving AI/AN/NH communities' access to culturally appropriate and feasible EBPs. The steps require collective action from federal agencies, national partners, EBP program developers and administrators, local organizations, and Elders to ensure EBPs are accessible and culturally appropriate for AI/AN/NH Elders.</p>","PeriodicalId":47956,"journal":{"name":"Health Promotion Practice","volume":" ","pages":"249-259"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Experiences With and Access to Evidence-Based Health Promotion Programs for Older American Indian, Alaska Native, and Native Hawaiian Peoples.\",\"authors\":\"R Turner Goins, Collette Adamsen, Becky Bendixen, Melody Woodrich-Fernando, Jennie R Joe, Robin Besse, Kathleen Zuke\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/15248399231201552\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Evidence-based programs (EBPs) work effectively for participants whose characteristics match those of the EBP research participants. However, EBPs have been almost exclusively developed and evaluated for the general U.S. population with limited American Indian, Alaska Native, and Native Hawaiian (AI/AN/NH) community engagement. Thus, an AI/AN/NH Evidence-Based Program Advisory Council sought to identify AI/AN/NH peoples' experiences with and access to EBPs. We held 20 listening sessions with AI/AN/NH Elder services program staff (<u>n</u> = 118) and with AI/AN/NH Elders (<u>n</u> = 82) and conducted a self-administered online survey with Title VI Directors (<u>n</u> = 63). The six themes that emerged from the listening sessions with staff included misunderstanding community engagement, valuing fidelity over flexibility, lack of cultural awareness, assumptions about available infrastructure, unrealistic implementation timelines, and funding restrictions. Listening session themes with Elders included definitions of aging well, participation motivators, preferred activities, participation barriers, and unmet needs. Survey data indicated that programming of greatest interest for Elders as identified by Title VI Directors and staff included and/or addressed cultural activities (81%), socialization (75%), diabetes (73%), caregiving (68%), and nutrition (68%). Seventy-six percent of survey respondents had heard of EBPs and 24% indicated that EBPs were not being implemented in their community. The Advisory Council developed specific action steps with the goal of improving AI/AN/NH communities' access to culturally appropriate and feasible EBPs. The steps require collective action from federal agencies, national partners, EBP program developers and administrators, local organizations, and Elders to ensure EBPs are accessible and culturally appropriate for AI/AN/NH Elders.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47956,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Health Promotion Practice\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"249-259\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Health Promotion Practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/15248399231201552\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/10/10 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Promotion Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/15248399231201552","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/10/10 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

循证计划(EBP)对那些特征与循证计划研究参与者相匹配的参与者有效。然而,EBP几乎完全是为美国普通人口开发和评估的,美国印第安人、阿拉斯加原住民和夏威夷原住民(AI/AN/NH)社区参与度有限。因此,一个AI/an/NH循证项目咨询委员会试图确定AI/an/NH人群使用EBP的经历和获得EBP的途径。我们与AI/AN/NH老年服务项目工作人员(n=118)和AI/AN/NH老年人(n=82)举行了20次聆听会议,并与第六章主任(n=63)进行了一项自我管理的在线调查。与工作人员的聆听会议产生的六个主题包括误解社区参与、重视忠诚度而非灵活性、缺乏文化意识、对可用基础设施的假设、不切实际的实施时间表和资金限制。与老年人的听力会议主题包括老龄化的定义、参与动机、首选活动、参与障碍和未满足的需求。调查数据表明,第六章主任和工作人员确定的老年人最感兴趣的节目包括和/或涉及文化活动(81%)、社会化(75%)、糖尿病(73%)、护理(68%)和营养(68%)。76%的受访者听说过EBP,24%的受访者表示他们的社区没有实施EBP。咨询委员会制定了具体的行动步骤,旨在改善AI/AN/NH社区获得文化上合适和可行的EBP的机会。这些步骤需要联邦机构、国家合作伙伴、EBP项目开发人员和管理人员、地方组织和老年人采取集体行动,以确保EBP可供AI/AN/NH老年人使用,并在文化上适合他们。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Experiences With and Access to Evidence-Based Health Promotion Programs for Older American Indian, Alaska Native, and Native Hawaiian Peoples.

Evidence-based programs (EBPs) work effectively for participants whose characteristics match those of the EBP research participants. However, EBPs have been almost exclusively developed and evaluated for the general U.S. population with limited American Indian, Alaska Native, and Native Hawaiian (AI/AN/NH) community engagement. Thus, an AI/AN/NH Evidence-Based Program Advisory Council sought to identify AI/AN/NH peoples' experiences with and access to EBPs. We held 20 listening sessions with AI/AN/NH Elder services program staff (n = 118) and with AI/AN/NH Elders (n = 82) and conducted a self-administered online survey with Title VI Directors (n = 63). The six themes that emerged from the listening sessions with staff included misunderstanding community engagement, valuing fidelity over flexibility, lack of cultural awareness, assumptions about available infrastructure, unrealistic implementation timelines, and funding restrictions. Listening session themes with Elders included definitions of aging well, participation motivators, preferred activities, participation barriers, and unmet needs. Survey data indicated that programming of greatest interest for Elders as identified by Title VI Directors and staff included and/or addressed cultural activities (81%), socialization (75%), diabetes (73%), caregiving (68%), and nutrition (68%). Seventy-six percent of survey respondents had heard of EBPs and 24% indicated that EBPs were not being implemented in their community. The Advisory Council developed specific action steps with the goal of improving AI/AN/NH communities' access to culturally appropriate and feasible EBPs. The steps require collective action from federal agencies, national partners, EBP program developers and administrators, local organizations, and Elders to ensure EBPs are accessible and culturally appropriate for AI/AN/NH Elders.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Health Promotion Practice
Health Promotion Practice PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH-
CiteScore
3.80
自引率
5.30%
发文量
126
期刊介绍: Health Promotion Practice (HPP) publishes authoritative articles devoted to the practical application of health promotion and education. It publishes information of strategic importance to a broad base of professionals engaged in the practice of developing, implementing, and evaluating health promotion and disease prevention programs. The journal"s editorial board is committed to focusing on the applications of health promotion and public health education interventions, programs and best practice strategies in various settings, including but not limited to, community, health care, worksite, educational, and international settings. Additionally, the journal focuses on the development and application of public policy conducive to the promotion of health and prevention of disease.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信