Health-promoting factors in higher education for a sustainable working life - protocol for a multicenter longitudinal study.
Health promotion
Salutogenesis
Students’ health
Sustainable working life
Journal
BMC public health
ISSN: 1471-2458
Titre abrégé: BMC Public Health
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100968562
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
14 Feb 2020
14 Feb 2020
Historique:
received:
08
05
2019
accepted:
08
01
2020
entrez:
16
2
2020
pubmed:
16
2
2020
medline:
17
6
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The World Health Organization has highlighted the importance of health promotion for health service providers in order to ensure sustainable working life for individuals involved in providing health services. Such sustainability begins when students are preparing to manage their own future health and welfare in working life. It has been suggested that universities, employees and trainee health professionals should adopt or follow a salutogenic approach that not only complements the providing of information on known health risks but also favors health promotion strategies. This paper describes the study design and data collection methods in a planned study aiming to explore health-promoting factors for a sustainable working life among students in higher education within healthcare and social work. This protocol describes a multicenter longitudinal study involving Swedish students on higher education programs in the healthcare and social work sectors. In 2018, the study invited students on seven education programs at six universities to participate. These programs were for qualification as: biomedical laboratory scientists (n = 121); dental hygienists (n = 87); nurses (n = 1411); occupational therapists (n = 111); physiotherapists (n = 48); radiographers (n = 60); and, social workers (n = 443). In total, 2283 students were invited to participate. Participants completed a baseline, a self-reported questionnaire including six validated instruments measuring health-promoting factors and processes. There are to be five follow-up questionnaires. Three while the students are studying, one a year after graduating, and one three years after graduating. Each questionnaire captures different health-promoting dimensions, namely: health-promoting resources (i.e. sense of coherence); occupational balance; emotional intelligence; health and welfare; social interaction; and work and workplace experiences/perceptions. This study focuses on the vastly important aspect of promoting a sustainable working life for healthcare and social work employees. In contrast to previous studies in this area, the present study uses different, validated instruments in health promotion, taking a salutogenic approach. It is hoped that, by stimulating the implementation of new strategies, the study's findings will lead to education programs that prepare students better for a sustainable working life in healthcare and social work.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
The World Health Organization has highlighted the importance of health promotion for health service providers in order to ensure sustainable working life for individuals involved in providing health services. Such sustainability begins when students are preparing to manage their own future health and welfare in working life. It has been suggested that universities, employees and trainee health professionals should adopt or follow a salutogenic approach that not only complements the providing of information on known health risks but also favors health promotion strategies. This paper describes the study design and data collection methods in a planned study aiming to explore health-promoting factors for a sustainable working life among students in higher education within healthcare and social work.
METHODS
METHODS
This protocol describes a multicenter longitudinal study involving Swedish students on higher education programs in the healthcare and social work sectors. In 2018, the study invited students on seven education programs at six universities to participate. These programs were for qualification as: biomedical laboratory scientists (n = 121); dental hygienists (n = 87); nurses (n = 1411); occupational therapists (n = 111); physiotherapists (n = 48); radiographers (n = 60); and, social workers (n = 443). In total, 2283 students were invited to participate. Participants completed a baseline, a self-reported questionnaire including six validated instruments measuring health-promoting factors and processes. There are to be five follow-up questionnaires. Three while the students are studying, one a year after graduating, and one three years after graduating. Each questionnaire captures different health-promoting dimensions, namely: health-promoting resources (i.e. sense of coherence); occupational balance; emotional intelligence; health and welfare; social interaction; and work and workplace experiences/perceptions.
DISCUSSION
CONCLUSIONS
This study focuses on the vastly important aspect of promoting a sustainable working life for healthcare and social work employees. In contrast to previous studies in this area, the present study uses different, validated instruments in health promotion, taking a salutogenic approach. It is hoped that, by stimulating the implementation of new strategies, the study's findings will lead to education programs that prepare students better for a sustainable working life in healthcare and social work.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32059653
doi: 10.1186/s12889-020-8181-3
pii: 10.1186/s12889-020-8181-3
pmc: PMC7023742
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Multicenter Study
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
233Références
Nurse Educ Today. 2011 Nov;31(8):855-60
pubmed: 21292360
Hum Resour Health. 2010 Apr 27;8:10
pubmed: 20423491
J Epidemiol Community Health. 2005 Jun;59(6):440-2
pubmed: 15911636
Scand J Occup Ther. 2014 May;21(3):227-31
pubmed: 24649971
Health Promot Int. 2010 Mar;25(1):94-106
pubmed: 20167825
Work. 2013;45(3):379-87
pubmed: 23324702
J Interprof Care. 2005 Mar;19(2):102-14
pubmed: 15823885
Educ Health (Abingdon). 2006 Nov;19(3):385-7
pubmed: 17178522
Int Rev Psychiatry. 2011 Dec;23(6):516-24
pubmed: 22272589
Int J Nurs Stud. 2014 Apr;51(4):625-39
pubmed: 24094609
Work. 2012;42(3):403-14
pubmed: 22523019
Int J Nurs Stud. 2014 Apr;51(4):612-24
pubmed: 24207027
J Nurs Manag. 2012 Sep;20(6):709-12
pubmed: 22967290
Br J Nurs. 2011 Apr 28-May 12;20(8):489-96
pubmed: 21537281
Glob Health Promot. 2013 Jun;20(2):30-8
pubmed: 23797938
PLoS One. 2010 Dec 08;5(12):e14265
pubmed: 21170381
Int J Nurs Stud. 2012 Aug;49(8):988-1001
pubmed: 22542085
Br J Psychol. 2007 May;98(Pt 2):273-89
pubmed: 17456273
Qual Health Res. 2011 Mar;21(3):410-8
pubmed: 20682966
Work. 2010;35(2):153-61
pubmed: 20164610
Aust Occup Ther J. 2011 Dec;58(6):397-404
pubmed: 22111641
Health Promot Int. 2006 Sep;21(3):238-44
pubmed: 16717056
Scand J Caring Sci. 1993;7(1):3-10
pubmed: 8502852
JAMA. 2013 Nov 27;310(20):2191-4
pubmed: 24141714
J Epidemiol Community Health. 2005 Jun;59(6):460-6
pubmed: 15911640
Work. 2020;65(1):97-109
pubmed: 31868716
Br J Nurs. 2013 Jan 24-Feb 13;22(2):86-94
pubmed: 23587891
Pilot Feasibility Stud. 2018 Jan 8;4:28
pubmed: 29321942
J Nurs Manag. 2015 Sep;23(6):736-43
pubmed: 24383539
J Clin Nurs. 2011 Aug;20(15-16):2183-94
pubmed: 21535458
J Pers Assess. 2017 May-Jun;99(3):304-314
pubmed: 27690638
Scand J Public Health. 2009 Jan;37(1):13-9
pubmed: 19141550
Int Rev Psychiatry. 2011 Dec;23(6):495-500
pubmed: 22272586
Scand J Occup Ther. 2014 Nov;21(6):415-20
pubmed: 25100158
Int J Dent Hyg. 2018 Feb;16(1):103-113
pubmed: 27860378
J Psychiatr Ment Health Nurs. 2014 Mar;21(2):106-13
pubmed: 23578272
J Epidemiol Community Health. 2006 May;60(5):376-81
pubmed: 16614325