3220.0: Monday, November 13, 2000 - Board 4

Abstract #15736

Strategic match or miss? Association between health promotion intervention strategies, intervention settings, and public health themes in the North Karelia Project

Lucie Lévesque, PhD1, Jennifer Duplantie, BSc Candidate1, Margaret Cargo, PhD1, Lucie Richard, PhD2, Lise Gauvin, PhD3, and Louise Potvin, PhD3. (1) Groupe de recherche interdiscipliaire en santé (GRIS; Interdisciplinary Health Research Group), Université de Montréal, P.O. Box 6128, Downtown Station, Montréal, QC H3C 3J7, Canada, 514-343-6135, lucie.levesque.2@umontreal.ca, (2) Département de Sciences Infirmières (Department of Nursing), Université de Montréal, P.O. Box 6128, Downtown Station, Montréal, QC H3C 3J7, Canada, (3) Département de Médecine Sociale et Préventive (Department of Social and Preventive Medicine), Université de Montréal, P.O. Box 6128, Downtown Station, Montréal, H3C 3J7, Canada

Health promotion programs are increasingly designed and implemented as complex packages containing a host of intervention strategies comprised of multiple activities, directed at a variety of targets, within a multitude of settings. However, optimal combinations of strategies for addressing a specific public health problem within a given setting have not been identified. As a first step towards this endeavor, we applied a recently developed analytical procedure to archival data from the North Karelia Project. Our purposes were 1) to describe the degree of variability in intervention strategies used within and between projects, and 2) to explore associations between intervention strategies on the one hand and intervention settings and public health themes on the other. For each complete intervention description, five intervention components were assessed: program theme, target, setting, intervention strategy, and activity. The final database included 229 interventions nested within 23 projects that addressed 5 public health themes (nutrition, smoking, hypertension, post-cardiac rehabilitation, multiple risk factors). Multilevel modelling analyses revealed significant between project variability in intervention strategies with intraclass correlations ranging from .16 to .37. For example, when the North Karelia Project team was intervening in organizational settings to influence smoking, only about half of the intervention strategies were targeted directly at organizational change. In contrast, when interventions unfolded in organizational settings but were focused on other public health themes about 75% of interventions were aimed at changing the organizational structure or functioning. We conclude that intervention strategies are associated with intervention setting and specific public health themes.

Keywords: Community-Based Health Promotion, Intervention

Presenting author's disclosure statement:
Organization/institution whose products or services will be discussed: None
I do not have any significant financial interest/arrangement or affiliation with any organization/institution whose products or services are being discussed in this session.

The 128th Annual Meeting of APHA