Korean Journal of Health Education and Promotion (보건교육건강증진학회지)

Korean Society for Health Education and Promotion (한국보건교육건강증진학회)
권호 표지

Program Theory Evaluation of a Lifestyle Intervention Program for the Prevention and Treatment of Metabolic Syndrome

대사증후군 상태 개선을 위한 생활습관 중재프로그램의 프로그램 이론 평가

  • Yoo, Seung-Hyun (Seoul National University Graduate School of Public Health/ Seoul National University Center for Health Promotion Research) ;
  • Kim, Hye-Kyeong (Health Promotion Research Institute, Korea Association of Health Promotion)
  • 유승현 (서울대학교 보건대학원 / 서울대학교 건강증진연구센터) ;
  • 김혜경 (한국건강관리협회 건강증진연구소)
  • Received : 2010.11.24
  • Accepted : 2010.12.11
  • Published : 2010.12.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Objectives: The purpose of this study is to evaluate the program theory of a lifestyle intervention program for the prevention and treatment of metabolic syndrome. Methods: The program evaluated is a tailored intervention for multiple health behavior associated with metabolic syndrome which is informed by theoretical constructs from the Intervention Mapping and Transtheoretical model. The program components include one-to-one health counseling, a self-management handbook, and a health diary. To evaluate program impact theory we examined the logic of program goals and objectives, intervention methods and strategies, and the theoretical constructs of program materials through document review and matrix building. Results: This evaluation has found that the intervention program applied social cognitive theory constructs to design intervention methods and strategies in addition to the Transtheoretical model: self-monitoring for goal setting and monitoring skill, outcome expectation for the benefits of health behavior change, and interaction with environment for observational learning through modeling. While the intervention addresses multiple determinants and behaviors, it is limited to an individual level and lacks social and environmental approaches. Following the Transtheoretical framework, the contents of the intervention materials were developed utilizing consciousness raising as a main strategy for earlier stages of change, and counterconditioning and stimulus control for later stages of change. Conclusion: Program theory evaluation can be a process of enhancing program validity. It would also be necessary for providing basis for efficient program implementation. When comparisons of program theory between similar programs are possible, program theory and validity will be strengthened when comparisons of program theories between similar programs are possible.

Keywords

References

  1. 김병성. 한국인에서의 대사증후군의 유병률. 대한임상건강증진학회지, 2001;2(1):17-25.
  2. 서울시 대사증후군 관리사업 지원단. 서울시와 5樂하자!http://www.5check.or.kr. 2009.
  3. 유승현, 김혜경. 건강증진 기획모형의 중재기획 단계 비교:PRECEDE-PROCEED와 Intervention Mapping. 보건교육 건강증진학회지 2010; 27(2): 141-149.
  4. 이은희, 김혜경, 이윤희, 문순영, 권은주, 지선하. 생활습관 중재프로그램이 성인의 건강생활습관실천과 대사증후군개선에 미치는 효과 분석. 보건교육건강증진학회지,2007;24(3):1-19.
  5. 중앙일보. 한국대사증후군포럼 발족. 중앙일보 2010년 10월 25 일자.
  6. 최영근, 오한진, 주일우. 한국 폐경 여성에서 생물학적 스트레스 지표와 대사증후군의 요소. 대한임상건강증진학회지 2009; 9(1): 50-55.
  7. American Heart Association Nutrition Committee. Diet and lifestyle recommendations revision 2006: A scientific statement from the American Heart Association Nutrition Committee. Circulation, 2006;114:82-96. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.106.176158
  8. Bartholomew LK, Parcel GS, Kok G, Gottlieb NH. Planning health promotion programs: Intervention Mapping, 2nd ed. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 2006.
  9. Blair SN. Changes in physical fitness and all cause mortality: A prospective study of healty and unhealthy men. Journal of the American Medical Association, 1995;273:1093-1098. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.273.14.1093
  10. Expert panel on detection, evaluation and treatment of high blood cholesterol in adults (Adult treatment panel III). Executive summary of the third report of the National Cholesterol Education Program(NCEP). Journal of the American Medical Association, 2001;285:2486-2497. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.285.19.2486
  11. Meigs JB. Invited commentary: Insulin resistance syndrome? Syndrome X? Multiple metabolic syndrome? A syndrome at all? Factor analysis reveals patterns in the fabric of correlated metabolic risk factors. American Journal of Epidemiology, 2000;152:908-911. https://doi.org/10.1093/aje/152.10.908
  12. Meigs JB. Epidemiology of the metabolic syndrome. American Journal of Managed Care, 2002;8(11 Suppl):S282-S292.
  13. Ohta Y, Tsuchihashi T, Ueno M, Kajioka T, Onaka U, Tominaga M. et al. relationp between the awareness of salt restriction and the actual salt intake in hypertensive patients. Hypertension Research, 2004;27:243-246. https://doi.org/10.1291/hypres.27.243
  14. Riccardi G, Rivellese A. Dietary treatment of the metabolic syndrome: The optimal diet. British Journal of Nutrition, 2000;83:S143-S148. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007114500000180
  15. Rossi PH, Lipsey MW, Freeman HE. Evaluation: A systematic approach, 7th ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 2004.
  16. Saito I, Murata K, Hirose H, Tsujioka M, Kawabe H. Relation between blood pressure control, body mass index, and intensity of medical treatment. Hypertension Research, 2003:26:711-715. https://doi.org/10.1291/hypres.26.711
  17. Sattar N, Gaw A, Scherbakova O, et al. Metabolic syndrome with and without C-reactive protein as a predictor of coronary heart disease and diabetes in the West of Scotland Coronary Prevention Study. Circulation, 2003;108:414–419. https://doi.org/10.1161/01.CIR.0000080897.52664.94
  18. Uzu T, Kimura G, Yamaguchi A, Kanasaki M, Isshiki K, Araki S. et al. Enhanced sodium sensitivity and disturbed circadian rhythm of blood pressure in essential hypertension. Journal of Hypertension, 2006;24:1627-1632. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.hjh.0000239299.71001.77