| 徐莉,瞿旭平,毛晨佳,马海燕,刘婷婕,胡菡琼,杨其法,许亮文.运用跨理论模型对中小学生久坐行为干预效果评价[J].中华流行病学杂志,2011,32(2):142-145 |
| 运用跨理论模型对中小学生久坐行为干预效果评价 |
| valuation on the effects of an education program regarding the sedentary behavior among school-aged children using Transtheoretical Model |
| 收稿日期:2010-10-09 出版日期:2014-09-10 |
| DOI： |
| 中文关键词: 跨理论模型 久坐行为 中小学生 |
| 英文关键词: Transtheoretical Model Sedentary behavior Primary and secondary students |
| 基金项目:杭州市高校重点实验室科技创新项目(20080433T07) |
|
| 摘要点击次数: 3422 |
| 全文下载次数: 1116 |
| 中文摘要: |
| 目的 运用跨理论模型对杭州市中小学生久坐行为进行健康促进干预,并对干预效果进行评价.方法 采用多阶段抽样的方法抽取杭州市5所小学和4所中学,选取小学三至五年级、初一及初二年级学生,分为对照组和干预组.对干预组不同阶段的学生进行针对性的干预,比较干预前后2组学生久坐行为的变化阶段、变化过程及变化水平,并与同期对照比较.结果 随访时干预组行为逐步向意向、准备和维持阶段转变,行动和维持阶段的人数比例高于对照组;干预后2组学生教学日久坐时间差异无统计学意义;干预组节假日平均久坐时间为(2.53±1.62)h,低于干预前的(2.84±1.82)h及对照组的(2.78±1.72)h;干预后干预组在变化过程的平均得分(2.98±0.77)高于对照组的平均得分(2.80±0.81),干预组在变化过程、决策平衡(正面因素)及自我效能的平均得分分别为2.98±0.77、3.06±0.75及3.13±0.72,均高于干预前,对照组仅在变化过程及自我效能平均得分有提高.结论 有针对性的干预对转变中小学生节假日久坐行为有较为显著作用,但对教学日久坐行为的改变效果不明显. |
| 英文摘要: |
| Objective To evaluate the outcome of a health education program on sedentary behavior among primary and secondary school children through Transtheoretical Model. Methods Five primary schools and four middle schools were selected and students from grade 3 to 5 in primary schools and grade 1 to 2 in middle schools were selected to take part in the program, as control and intervention groups respectively. Corresponding intervention measures were provided to the intervention group, with phase, process and level of changing on sedentary behavior measured for both groups during the follow-up period. Comparison to the above items on the two groups was measured statistically. Results Behavior among the intervention group was gradually changed regarding: phase contemplation, preparation and maintenance, with the proportions in phase action and maintenance higher than the control group. After carrying out of intervention programs, the sedentary time on weekdays between the two groups did not show significant differences. However, the sedentary time on weekends of intervention group was (2.53 ± 1.62) hours, significantly lower than the hours from the baseline survey (2.84 ± 1.82) and the control group (2.78 ± 1.72) respectively.During the follow-up period, the average score of intervention group in the changing process was (2.98 ± 0.77), higher than the control group (2.80 ± 0.81 ). At the same time, the average score of intervention group in the process of changing, decisional balance (pros) and self-efficacy were 2.98 ±0.77, 3.06 ± 0.75 and 3.13 ± 0.72, respectively, all higher than data from the baseline survey. In the control group, the process of changing and the average score on self-efficacy had improved.Conclusion The corresponding intervention program seemed to have played a significant role among the school-aged children on their sedentary behavior during the weekend but no significant difference was found in the weekdays. |
|
查看全文
Html全文
查看/发表评论 下载PDF阅读器 |
|
| 关闭 |
|
|
|
