Participation in Health Programs in Community, Work and Healthcare Settings

A special issue of Medicina (ISSN 1648-9144).

Deadline for manuscript submissions: closed (28 February 2021) | Viewed by 2193

Special Issue Information

Dear Colleagues,

The participation of people in decision-making processes that affect their health is a key feature in the Declaration of Alma-Ata (1978) and the Ottawa Charter for Health Promotion (1986). WHO supports participation in health programs as one of the main axes for the development of the Primary Health Care strategy (World Health Report 2008) and in reaching health system goals (WHO Health Systems Strategy 2007). According to WHO, participation can take on several different forms, from informing and consulting people and involving them in the design and development of health programs, up to empowering individuals and communities to control the key decisions that affect their health and wellbeing.

Since participation was evidenced as a key element for health policies and interventions, evidence on the impact of participation in the development and results of health programs has been growing. For example, under the MeSH term ‘Patient participation’ (introduced in 1978 as ‘patient involvement in the decision-making process in matters pertaining to health’), hundreds of systematic reviews and thousands of single studies have been published. The NICE guideline Community engagement: improving health and wellbeing and reducing health inequalities (NICE 2016) assess the best evidence supporting effective community engagement approaches to reduce health inequalities and ensure health and wellbeing, and provides recommendations regarding principles of good practice to make engagement more effective, collaborations and partnerships approaches to encourage participation, and community engagement as an integral part of health and wellbeing initiatives, among others. In work settings, research on participatory ergonomics programs is showing effectiveness in reducing symptoms, lost days of work, and claims in relation to musculoskeletal disorders of occupational origin, a major work-related disease burden.

More evidence is needed regarding the effectiveness, contexts, processes, barriers, and facilitators to the implementation of participatory health programs. This is the main interest for this Special Issue of the journal Medicina, and we encourage health researchers and practitioners to submit their studies on participation for health.

Manuscript Submission Information

Manuscripts should be submitted online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging in to this website. Once you are registered, click here to go to the submission form. Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline. All submissions that pass pre-check are peer-reviewed. Accepted papers will be published continuously in the journal (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the special issue website. Research articles, review articles as well as short communications are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 100 words) can be sent to the Editorial Office for announcement on this website.

Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are thoroughly refereed through a single-blind peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. Medicina is an international peer-reviewed open access monthly journal published by MDPI.

Please visit the Instructions for Authors page before submitting a manuscript. The Article Processing Charge (APC) for publication in this open access journal is 1800 CHF (Swiss Francs). Submitted papers should be well formatted and use good English. Authors may use MDPI's English editing service prior to publication or during author revisions.

Keywords

  • Patient participation
  • Community participation
  • Health services
  • Public health
  • Occupational health
  • Community health services
  • Evaluation research

Published Papers (1 paper)

Order results
Result details
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:

Research

9 pages, 1171 KiB  
Article
Disaster Prevention Education along with Weekly Exercise Improves Self-Efficacy in Community-Dwelling Japanese People—A Randomized Control Trial
by Akihiko Katayama, Ayako Hase and Nobuyuki Miyatake
Medicina 2021, 57(3), 231; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/medicina57030231 - 02 Mar 2021
Cited by 2 | Viewed by 1882
Abstract
Background and Objectives: Both disaster prevention and health promotion have become public health challenges in Japan. Maintaining physical fitness from the perspective of disaster prevention and maintaining physical fitness from the perspective of health are basically covering similar issues, they are seen [...] Read more.
Background and Objectives: Both disaster prevention and health promotion have become public health challenges in Japan. Maintaining physical fitness from the perspective of disaster prevention and maintaining physical fitness from the perspective of health are basically covering similar issues, they are seen as different from one another because of differences in administrative jurisdiction in Japan. In the case of disaster prevention education, physical fitness is not mentioned. In and outside Japan, partial integration of disaster prevention education and health education is required. This study compares and examines the effects of disaster prevention education and traditional exercise education, as well as exercise practice. A randomized controlled trial alongside an evacuation behavior model during the event of a disaster were used in this research. Materials and Methods: A total of 97 community-dwelling participants were randomly allocated to two groups, a disaster prevention education group (Group D) and a traditional exercise education group (Group E). Group D received disaster prevention education with weekly exercise. Group E received traditional exercise education with weekly exercise. After ten weeks of intervention, the total evacuation time of the disaster evacuation model course, physical fitness, self-efficacy (General Self-Efficacy Scale: GSES), and health-related quality of life (QOL) were compared between the two groups. Results: No differences were observed between the two groups regarding the changes in the parameters of total evacuation time, physical fitness, and health-related QOL. However, the changes in GSES scores were significantly higher in Group D (1.4 ± 3.9) than in Group E (−1.1 ± 7.5). Conclusions: Disaster prevention education with weekly exercise significantly increased participants’ self-efficacy compared to traditional exercise education. The combination of disaster prevention education and exercise practice may have a positive effect not only on disaster prevention behavior but also on self-efficacy in health promotion. Disaster prevention education does not directly influence health promotion, but it may be a very effective method for indirectly promoting health. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

Back to TopTop