Factors Affecting Health Promotion Behavior among Workers with High Risk of Metabolic Syndrome: Based on Theory of Planned Behavior

Sungwon Park; Sook Ja Yang

doi:10.12799/jkachn.2015.26.2.128

Journal List > J Korean Acad Community Health Nurs > v.26(2) > 1058372

Go to TopGo to Top Go to BottomGo to Bottom

TOOLS

Park and Yang: Factors Affecting Health Promotion Behavior among Workers with High Risk of Metabolic Syndrome: Based on Theory of Planned Behavior

Original Article

Journal of Korean Academy of Community Health Nursing 2015; 26(2): 128-139.

Published online: 30 June 2015

DOI: https://doi.org/10.12799/jkachn.2015.26.2.128

Factors Affecting Health Promotion Behavior among Workers with High Risk of Metabolic Syndrome: Based on Theory of Planned Behavior

Sungwon Park¹, Sook Ja Yang²

¹Banyan Tree Club & Spa Seoul · Division of Nursing Science, EwhaWomans University, Seoul, Korea.

²Division of Nursing Science, Ewha Womans University, Seoul, Korea.

Corresponding author: Yang, Sook Ja. Division of Nursing Science, Ewha Womans University, 52 Ewhayeodae-gil, Seodaemun-gu, Seoul 120-750, Korea. Tel: +82-2-3277-4652, Fax: +82-2-3277-2850, yangsj@ewha.ac.kr

Received 30 January 2015 Revised 4 June 2015 Accepted 19 June 2015

(open-access):

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this study was to identify factors affecting health promotion behavior among workers with high risk of metabolic syndrome. This study was based on the planned behavior theory.

Methods

The participants were 167 workers at high risk of metabolic syndrome. Data were collected using a structured questionnaire. Surveyed variables were attitude, subjective norm, perceived behavioral control, intention, and health promotion behavior. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, t-test, ANOVA, Pearson's correlation coefficients, and hierarchical regression analysis with SPSS/WIN 22.0.

Results

Perceived behavioral control affected the intention of health promotion behavior among the workers with high risk of metabolic syndrome. It explained 62% of variance in the intention of health promotion behavior (F=40.09, p<.001). Perceived behavioral control and occupation affected health promotion behavior among the risk workers with high risk of metabolic syndrome. The two factors explained 16% of variance in health promotion behavior (F=4.95, p<.001).

Conclusion

The findings of this study suggest that perceived behavioral control is the only factor affecting health promotion behavior when the theory of planned behavior was applied. Therefore, intervention programs for improving health promotion behavior should be focused on strengthening perceived behavioral control.

Keywords: Metabolic syndrome X, Health promotion, Workers, Health behavior

Figures and Tables

Table 1

Sociodemographic Characteristics (N=167)

Variables	Categories	n (%) or M±SD
Gender	Male	137 (82.0)
Gender	Female	30 (18.0)
Age (year)		38.7±8.41
	20~29	28 (16.8)
	30~39	57 (34.1)
	40~49	67 (40.1)
	50~59	15 (9.0)
Education	≤Middle school	2 (1.2)
	Highschool	32 (19.2)
	College	128 (76.6)
	>College	5 (3.0)
Marriage	Yes	119 (71.3)
Marriage	No	48 (28.7)
Occupation	Service	66 (39.5)
Occupation	Cooking	101 (60.5)
Career experience (year)	<5	22 (13.2)
	5~<10	26 (15.5)
	10~<15	38 (22.8)
	15~<20	38 (22.8)
	≥20	43 (25.7)
Subjective health status	Very unhealthy	1 (0.6)
	Unhealthy	24 (14.4)
	Usual	83 (49.7)
	Healthy	56 (33.5)
	Very healthy	3 (1.8)
Disease	Yes	26 (15.6)
Disease	No	141 (84.4)
Family history of metabolic syndrome	Yes	64 (38.3)
Family history of metabolic syndrome	No	103 (61.7)
Awareness of metabolic syndrome	Yes	102 (61.1)
Awareness of metabolic syndrome	No	65 (38.9)
Educational experience of metabolic syndrome	Yes	36 (21.6)
Educational experience of metabolic syndrome	No	131 (78.4)
Smoking	Yes	62 (37.1)
Smoking	No	105 (62.9)
Duration of smoking (year)^†		14.8±6.71
Daily cigarettes		11.1±5.24
Drinking alcohol	Yes	96 (57.5)
Drinking alcohol	No	71 (42.5)
Weekly drinking times	1	24 (25.0)
	2	39 (40.6)
	3	24 (25.0)
	≥4	9 (9.4)
Drinking quantity at once (Soju standards)^‡		7.7±4.23

^†62 Smokers; ^‡96 Drinkers.

Table 2

Metabolic Syndrome Risk Factor Characteristics (N=167)

Variables	Categories		n (%)	M±SD	p
Blood sugar^†	Normal group		111 (66.5)	90.1±6.52	<.001
Blood sugar^†	High risk group		56 (33.5)	112.5±17.27	<.001
Systolic blood pressure^‡	Normal group		94 (56.3)	118.1±6.22	.005
Systolic blood pressure^‡	High risk group		73 (43.7)	133.2±5.17	.005
Diastolic blood pressure^§	Normal group		123 (73.7)	77.3±4.26	<.001
Diastolic blood pressure^§	High risk group		44 (26.3)	85.5±3.02	<.001
Triglyceride level^∥	Normal group		111 (66.5)	89.1±30.80	<.001
Triglyceride level^∥	High risk group		56 (33.5)	217.1±78.83	<.001
High-density lipoprotein cholesterol^¶	Normal group	Male	154 (92.2)	55.5±10.40	.001
	Normal group	Female		65.5±12.92	.001
	High risk group	Male	13 (7.8)	35.7±3.06	<.001
	High risk group	Female		47.7±2.31	<.001
Waist circumference^#	Normal group	Male	137 (82.0)	81.2±4.77	<.001
	Normal group	Female		73.3±6.68	<.001
	High risk group	Male	30 (18.0)	96.1±5.61	<.001
	High risk group	Female		90.3±0.58	<.001
Number of metabolic-syndrome risk factors	1		100 (59.9)
Number of metabolic-syndrome risk factors	2		67 (40.1)

^†Blood sugar: Normal group<100 mg/dL, High risk group≥100 mg/dL; ^‡Systolic blood pressure: Normal group<130 mmHg, High risk group≥130 mmHg; ^§Diastolic blood pressure: Normal group<85 mmHg, High risk group≥85 mmHg; ^∥Triglyceride level: Normal group<150 mg/dL, High risk group≥150 mg/dL; ^¶High-density lipoprotein cholesterol: Male) Normal group>40 mg/dL, High risk group≤40 mg/dL, Female) Normal group>50mg/dL, High risk group≤50mg/dL; ^#Waist circumference: Male) Normal group<90 cm, High risk group≥90 cm, Female) Normal<85 cm, High risk group≥85 cm.

Table 3

Health Promotion Behavior Intention and Health Promotion Behavior in Accordance with Sociodemographic Characteristics (N=16)

Characteristics	Categories	Health promotion behavior intention			Health promotion behavior
Characteristics	Categories	M±SD	t or F	p	M±SD	t or F	p
Gender	Male	1.2±1.19	2.61	.012	0.2±0.62	0.46	.648
Gender	Female	0.6±1.14	2.61	.012	0.2±0.75	0.46	.648
Age (year)	<40	1.1±1.10	2.02	.884	0.2±0.68	0.99	.307
Age (year)	≥40	1.1±1.30	2.02	.884	0.3±0.60	0.99	.307
Education	≤High school	0.9±1.38	-1.19	.241	0.1±0.81	-0.97	.336
Education	≥College	1.2±1.15	-1.19	.241	0.3±0.59	-0.97	.336
Marriage	Yes	1.1±1.24	-0.28	.779	0.2±0.66	-0.38	.707
Marriage	No	1.1±1.12	-0.28	.779	0.3±0.59	-0.38	.707
Occupation	Service	1.2±1.25	1.19	.235	0.4±0.75	2.08	.040
Occupation	Cooking	1.0±1.17	1.19	.235	0.1±0.55	2.08	.040
Career experience (year)	<10	1.0±1.16	0.44	.645	0.1±0.56	0.92	.400
	10~<20	1.2±1.13			0.3±0.66
	≥20	1.0±1.38			0.2±0.59
Subjective health status	Not healthy	0.8±1.28	3.30	.039	0.2±0.89	4.81	.009
	Usual	1.0±1.19			0.1±0.50
	Healthy	1.4±1.14			0.4±0.65
Disease	Yes	0.9±1.09	-0.86	.395	0.1±0.53	-0.94	.351
Disease	No	1.1±1.22	-0.86	.395	0.3±0.66	-0.94	.351
Family history of metabolic syndrome	Yes	1.0±1.16	-1.09	.277	0.1±0.70	-1.36	.175
Family history of metabolic syndrome	No	1.2±1.23	-1.09	.277	0.3±0.60	-1.36	.175
Awareness of metabolic syndrome	Yes	1.1±1.17	0.16	.874	0.3±0.71	1.17	.244
Awareness of metabolic syndrome	No	1.1±1.27	0.16	.874	0.2±0.50	1.17	.244
Educational experience of metabolic syndrome	Yes	1.2±1.10	0.51	.612	0.4±0.69	1.89	.064
Educational experience of metabolic syndrome	No	1.1±1.23	0.51	.612	0.2±0.62	1.89	.064
Smoking	Yes	1.3±1.31	1.29	.199	0.2±0.59	-0.45	.651
Smoking	No	1.0±1.13	1.29	.199	0.3±0.67	-0.45	.651
Drinking alcohol	Yes	1.3±1.19	2.42	.017	0.3±0.68	1.49	.139
Drinking alcohol	No	0.8±1.18	2.42	.017	0.2±0.58	1.49	.139

Table 4

Factors Affecting Health Promotion Behavior Intention (N=167)

Variables	Step 1					Step 2
Variables	B	SE	β	t	p	B	SE	β	t	p
(Constant)	.90	.73		1.24	.217	.79	.47		1.68	.095
Gender	-.38	.26	-.12	-1.45	.148	-.19	.17	-.06	-1.11	.268
Education^†	.17	.24	.06	0.73	.465	-.05	.15	-.02	-0.30	.768
SHS	.35	.13	.20	2.62	.010	-.04	.09	-.02	-0.47	.643
Drinking status^†	-.31	.20	-.13	-1.55	.124	-.15	.13	-.06	-1.16	.247
Attitude						.07	.07	.05	0.96	.339
SN						.06	.06	.05	0.95	.334
PBC						.78	.05	.77	15.26	<.001
	Adjusted R²=.07, F=4.06, p=.004					Adjusted R²=.62, F=40.09, p<.001

SHS=subjecitve health status; SN=subjective norm; PBC=perceived behavioral control;

^†Dummy variables: Gender (1=Male), Education (1=Under highschool), Drinking status (1=Yes).

Table 5

Factors Affecting Health Promotion Behavior (N=167)

Variables	Step 1					Step 2					Step 3
Variables	B	SE	β	t	p	B	SE	β	t	p	B	SE	β	t	p
(Constant)	.16	.36		0.45	.656	.09	.35		0.26	.796	.04	.36		0.12	.905
Gender^†	-.06	.13	-.04	-0.46	.644	.01	.12	.01	0.07	.944	.02	.12	.01	0.19	.854
Education^†	-.22	.12	-.14	-1.81	.072	-.20	.11	-.13	-1.78	.076	-.20	.11	-.13	-1.77	.079
Occupation^†	-.00	.04	-.01	-0.09	.926	.02	.04	.04	0.52	.605	.03	.04	.60	0.55	.008
SHS	.17	.07	.19	2.47	.015	.08	.07	.09	1.21	.229	.08	.07	.10	1.25	.220
Attitude						-.03	.05	-.04	-0.52	.602	-.03	.05	-.05	-0.58	.561
SN						.01	.05	.02	0.26	.794	.01	.05	.02	0.19	.852
PBC						.21	.04	.39	5.10	<.001	.16	.06	.30	2.52	.013
Intention											.06	.06	.11	0.95	.346
	Adjusted R²=.04, F=2.62, p=.037					Adjusted R²=.16, F=5.54, p<.001					Adjusted R²=.16, F=4.95, p<.001

SHS=subjecitve health status; SN=subjective norm; PBC=perceived behavioral control;

^†Dummy variables: Gender (1=Male), Education (1=Under highschool), Occupation (1=Service).

Notes

This article is a condensed form of thr first author Sungwon Park's master's thesis from Ewha Womans University.

References

1. Oh SW. Shows the prevalence of metabolic syndrome in adults over 30 years old 28.8%! [Internet]. Seoul: Ministry of Health and Welfare, Division of Health Policy;2012. cited 2014 Mar 10. Available from: http://www.mw.go.kr/front_new/al/sal0301vw.jsp?PAR_MENU_ID=04&MENU_ID=0403&CONT_SEQ=268137&page=1.

2. Ryu S, Song J, Choi BY, Lee SJ, Kim WS, Chang YS, et al. Incidence and risk factors for metabolic syndrome in Korean male workers, age 30 to 39. Ann Epidemiol. 2007; 17(4):245–252. DOI: 10.1016/j.annepidem.2006.10.001.

3. Kim CJ, Park JB, Kim BT. Lifestyle characteristics, metabolic syndrome risk factors and risk of cardiovascular disease among workers in Kyeongki-do. Korean J Occup Health Nurs. 2008; 17(2):230–238.

4. Park SY, Yang YJ, Kim YR. Effects of nutrition education using a ubiquitous healthcare (u-health) service on metabolic syndrome in male workers. Korean J Nutr. 2011; 44(3):231–242. DOI: 10.4163/kjn.2011.44.3.231.

5. Maruyama C, Kimura M, Okumura H, Hayashi K, Arao T. Effect of a worksite-based intervention program on metabolic parameters in middle-aged male white-collar workers: A randomized controlled trial. Prev Med. 2010; 51(1):11–17. DOI: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2010.04.008.

6. Wannamethee SG, Shaper AG, Whincup PH. Modifiable lifestyle factors and the metabolic syndrome in older men: Effects of lifestyle changes. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2006; 54(12):1909–1914. DOI: 10.1111/j.1532-5415.2006.00974.x.

7. Kim YH, Park RJ, Park WJ, Kim MB, Moon JD. Predictors of metabolic syndrome among shipyard workers and its prevalence. Korean J Occup Environ Med. 2009; 21(3):209–217.

8. Grundy SM, Cleeman JI, Daniels SR, Donato KA, Eckel RH, Franklin BA, et al. Diagnosis and management of the metabolic syndrome: An American heart association/national heart, lung, and blood institute scientific statement. Circulation. 2005; 112(17):2735–2752.

9. Tsai TY, Cheng JF, Lai YM. Prevalence of metabolic syndrome and related factors in Taiwanese high-tech industry workers. Clinics (Sao Paulo). 2011; 66(9):1531–1535.

10. Kang JY, Cho SW, Lee JY, Sung SH, Park YK, Paek YM, et al. The effects of a worksite on-line health education program on metabolic syndrome risk factors and nurtient intakes of male workers. Korean J Nutr. 2010; 43(1):57–68. DOI: 10.4163/kjn.2010.43.1.57.

11. Bae SS. Approaches and theories of health promotion. Seoul: Gyechuk Munwhasa;2012. p. 524.

12. Ajzen I. The theory of planned behavior. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process. 1991; 50(2):179–211. DOI: 10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T.

13. Bae SS, Lee HJ, Lee CO, Jo HS. Predicting exercise behavior in female workers: An application of the theory of planned behavior. Korean J Health Educ Promot. 2003; 20(1):173–186.

14. Lee HJ, Jo BH. Factors affection intentions for health behaviors among male office workers: An analysis based on the theory of planned behavior. Korean J Occup Health Nurs. 2002; 11(1):31–43.

15. Payne N, Jones F, Harris PR. The role of perceived need within the theory of planned behavior: A comparison of exercise and healthy eating. Br J Health Psychol. 2004; 9(Pt 4):489–504.

16. Korean Academy of Medical Science. Metabolic syndrome: An overview [Internet]. Seoul: Korean Academy of Medical Science;2010. cited 2014 January 26. Available from: http://www.kams.or.kr/health/sub3.html.

17. Kang SW. Development of a lifestyle evaluation tool for patients with metabolic syndrome [dissertation]. [Seoul]: Yonsei University;2007. 120.

18. Plotnikoff RC, Lubans DR, Costigan SA, McCargar L. A test of the theory of planned behavior to predict physical activity in an overweight/obese population sample of adolescents from Alberta, Canada. Health Educ Behav. 2013; 40(4):415–425. DOI: 10.1177/1090198112455642.

19. Park BH, Lee MS, Hong JY, Bae SH, Kim EY, Kim KK, et al. The stages of physical activity and exercise behavior: An integrated approach to the theory of planned behavior. Asia Pac J Public Health. 2009; 21(1):71–83. DOI: 10.1177/1010539508327089.

20. Andrykowski MA, Beacham AO, Schmidt JE, Harper FW. Application of the theory of planned behavior to understand intentions to engage in physical and psychosocial health behaviors after cancer diagnosis. Psychooncology. 2006; 15(9):759–771.

21. Yeongdeungpo-gu Health Center. Metabolic syndrome free screening program [Internet]. Seoul: Yeongdeungpo-gu Health Center;2011. cited 2014 January 15. Available from: http://www.ydp.go.kr/health/page.do?mCode=E120020000.

22. National Health Insurance Service. Health screenings statistical yearbook in 2012. Seoul: National Health Insurance Service;2013. 12. Report No.: 11-B550928-000048-10.

23. Choi ES. The metabolic syndrome and associated risk factors among male workers in an electronics manufacturing company. Korean J Occup Environ Med. 2006; 18(1):35–45.

24. Gardner RE, Hausenblas HA. Exercise and diet determinants of overweight women participating in an exercise and diet program: A peospective examination of the theory of planned behavior. Women Health. 2005; 42(4):37–62.

25. Hunt HR, Gross AM. Prediction of exercise in patients across various stages of bariatric surgery: A comparison of the merits of the theory of reasoned action versus the theory of planned behavior. Behav Modif. 2009; 33(6):795–817. DOI: 10.1177/0145445509348055.

26. Conner M, Sandberg T, Norman P. Using action planning to promote exercise behavior. Ann Behav Med. 2010; 40(1):65–76. DOI: 10.1007/s12160-010-9190-8.

27. Murnaghan DA, Blachard CM, Rodgers WM, LaRosa JN, Mac-Quarrie CR, MacLellan DL, et al. Predictors of physical activity, healthy eating and being smoke-free in teens: A theory of planned behavior approach. Psychol Health. 2010; 25(8):925–941. DOI: 10.1080/08870440902866894.

28. de Bruijn GJ, Rhodes RE. Exploring exercise behavior, intention and habit strength relationships. Scand J Med Sci Sports. 2011; 21(3):482–491. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0838.2009.01064.x.

29. Chung HJ, Rho SJ, Lee KH. The effects of cooking operations duties and kitchen facilities on fatigue. J East Asian Soc Diet Life. 2008; 18(3):405–414.

30. Miller EL, Mitchell A. Metabolic syndrome: Screening, diagnosis, and management. J Midwifery Womens Health. 2006; 51(3):141–151.

TOOLS

Similar articles