Critical Analysis of a Health Promotion Initiative

Introduction

Excessive smoking of tobacco is a major issue of concern in high-income countries. This is because it has caused an increase in cases of tobacco-related diseases such as cancer, cardiovascular disease, and chronic respiratory diseases (Andrea, April, & Nina, 2018). The high rate of smoking is associated with disadvantaged individuals such as the unemployed and homeless (Bolliger, 2000). In Australia, the need to cease tobacco abuse among the disadvantaged group led to the development of “call it quits” intervention (Bonevski et al., 2018). This paper analyzes the intervention used in accordance with the Ottawa principle.

Description of Intervention

The effectiveness of “call it quits” intervention was determined using a randomized experiment. The trials were conducted by caseworkers of South wales Community Care Centre in Australia. The participants of the study were clients from the disadvantaged groups, who had self-reported to the clinic for counseling to stop smoking. The subjects were assigned to either the control group or the intervention group. Both groups were given gift bags and advice to quit smoking on the first visit. No other intervention was provided for the control group. However, the intervention group received gift vouchers, counseling sessions, written manuals, and free NRT after every visit for six months (Bonevski et al., 2018). The outcome was the absence of significant differences between the intervention group and the control group after six months.

Analysis of the Intervention in Relation to Ottawa Principles

Personal Skills Development

The intervention fostered personal skills of the patient development. It provided information to support personal and social growth of the client. For instance, at least five counseling sessions through phone and face to face were conducted. In addition, learners were given written intervention manuals, which improved self-management (Sebar, Morgan, & Lee, 2016). Social support, prevention of relapse, management of withdrawal symptoms, and enhancement of self-efficacy were provided as part of the intervention by the social workers. Thus, the principal of personal skills development was addressed well in the ”call it quits” intervention.

Supportive Environments Creation

“Call it quits” intervention partially created a supportive environment for the participants. This is because social workers and other members of the group provided support to the clients. On the other hand, the community was not involved in undertaking the intervention rather a personal behavioral approach was used. Community involvement would have alleviated stigmatization (Dugani, Bhutta, & Kissoon, 2017). In addition, counseling the disadvantaged groups and providing a source of income would have helped in creating safer environments.

Strengthening of Community Actions

The “call it quits” intervention has no consideration for strengthening the community action principle. In the study, it was sufficed that the center did not empower the community at large. Effective community action aids in setting better strategies, implementing interventions, and making decisions (Hindhede & Aagaard-Hansen, 2017). It is important to empower the communities and persuade them to take control of their destinies (Batterham, Hawkins, Collins, Buchbinder, & Osborne, 2016). Since, this principle was underutilized, some of the participants dropped out of the intervention due to depression, anxiety, and financial stress.

Reorientation of Health Services

The intervention of the study has a strong focus on reorienting health services. This is sufficed by the recommendations made from the findings, which addresses the government, healthcare workers, and health institutions. The health promotion ideas from the quits to smoke initiative to be utilized in other interventions targeting reduction in tobacco abuse was revealed. These strategies include the use of varenicline drugs, hiring specialized counselors, and raising the social capital of the disadvantaged groups (Kryzanowski et al., 2019). The government should play a role in reducing the risk factors contributing to substance use.

Building a Healthy Public Policy

The “call it quit” intervention embraced building public policy initiative fully. This health promotion strategy output can be used outside the health care industry. It provides critical information to the policy-makers and the government on ways to reduce substance abuse (Guyon, Lessard, Masse-Jolicoeur, & Tessier, 2019). In addition, the consequences of disadvantaging some citizens due to poor policies have been highlighted. Since obstacle for adopting healthy policies has been identified, the government and health sector should develop ways of eliminating them.

Analysis of Intervention in Relation to Equity Principles

Equity in health refers to a lack of health disparities between people in less and more advantaged social groups. It is based on moral, ethical, and human rights dimensions, also the priciple advocates for fairness, justice, equal access to quality care (Gustafsdottir, Fenger, Halldorsdottir, & Bjarnason, 2017). The “call it quits” intervention was tailor-made to fit individuals in the disadvantaged group consisting of the unemployed and homeless, who had unmet needs (Bonevski et al., 2018). The intervention was in line with the equity principles because it placed focus on subjects from a vulnerable group (Lynch & Perera, 2017). In addition, the perspective used encompassed an important worldwide problem that requires attention in regions, which are suffering from health-related financial and social burdens (Salamati & Naji, 2016). The marginalized areas was a representative of many other region that need proper interventions for patient and prevention education.

Reccomendations

The “call it quits” was not succsessful in causing smoke cessation among the subjects. Therefore, a new intervention to help the disadvantaged groups should be developed and tested. The development of personal skills needs to be improved in future studies (Sebar et al., 2019). This will be achieved by hiring qualified counselors to facilitate behavioral change. The principles of strengthening community actions and creating social enviroment are important (Guyon et al., 2019). Thus, they have to be maximed in the future trials.

References

  1. Andrea, S., April, F., & Nina, J. (2018). At-a-glance Bringing equity into the fold: A review of interventions to improve mental health. Health Promotion and Chronic Disease Prevention in Canada Research, Policy and Practice, 38(10), 380. Web.
  2. Batterham, R. W., Hawkins, M., Collins, P. A., Buchbinder, R., & Osborne, R. H. (2016). Health literacy: Applying current concepts to improve health services and reduce health inequalities. Public Health, 132, 3-12.
  3. Bolliger, C. T. (2000). Practical experiences in smoking reduction and cessation. Addiction, 95(11), 19-24.
  4. Bonevski, B., Twyman, L., Paul, C., D’Este, C., West, R., Siahpush, M., & Palazzi, K. (2018). Smoking cessation intervention delivered by social service organisations for a diverse population of Australian disadvantaged smokers: A pragmatic randomised controlled trial. Preventive Medicine, 112, 38-44.
  5. Dugani, S., Bhutta, Z. A., & Kissoon, N. (2017). Empowering people for sustainable development: The Ottawa Charter and beyond. Journal of Global Health, 7(1).
  6. Gustafsdottir, S. S., Fenger, K., Halldorsdottir, S., & Bjarnason, T. (2017). Social justice, access and quality of healthcare in an age of austerity: users’ perspective from rural Iceland. International Journal of Circumpolar Health, 76(1). Web.
  7. Guyon, A., Lessard, R., Masse-Jolicoeur, M., & Tessier, S. (2019). Healthy public policy competences for public health: interactive and practice-oriented curriculum: Ak’ingabe Guyon. European Journal of Public Health, 29(4), 186-700.
  8. Hindhede, A. L., & Aagaard-Hansen, J. (2017). Using social network analysis as a method to assess and strengthen participation in health promotion programs in vulnerable areas. Health Promotion Practice, 18(2), 175-183.
  9. Kryzanowski, J., Bloomquist, C. D., Dunn-Pierce, T., Murphy, L., Clarke, S., & Neudorf, C. (2019). Quality improvement as a population health promotion opportunity to reorient the healthcare system. Canadian Journal of Public Health, 110(1), 58-61.
  10. Lynch, J. F., & Perera, I. M. (2017). Framing health equity: US health disparities in comparative perspective. Journal of Health Politics, Policy and Law, 42(5), 803-839.
  11. Salamati, P., & Naji, Z. (2016). Social determinants of health: Gender inequity or inequality and WHO recommendations. Journal of the International Society for Burn Injuries, 42(5), 1154.
  12. Sebar, B., Morgan, K., & Lee, J. (2016). Health promotion principles and practice: Addressing complex public health issues using the Ottawa Charter. Public Health: Local and Global Perspectives, 45.