Journal List > Korean J Adult Nurs > v.25(2) > 1094363

TOOLS
Kwon and Park: The Effect of Health Promotion Program for Frail Elderly Residents on Health Promoting Behavior and Health Status
Original Article

Korean J Adult Nurs 2013;25(2):194-206.

Published online: 4 February 2013

DOI: https://doi.org/10.7475/kjan.2013.25.1.194

The Effect of Health Promotion Program for Frail Elderly Residents on Health Promoting Behavior and Health Status

Sang Min Kwon1, Jeong Sook Park2,

1Center for Continuing Eduction, Keimyung University, Daegu, Korea

2College of Nursing, Keimyung University, Daegu, Korea

Corresponding author: Park, Jeong Sook College of Nursing, Keimyung University, 1000 Shindang-dong, Dalsseo-gu, Daegu 704-701, Korea. Tel: +82-53-580-3907, Fax: +82-53-580-3907, E-mail: jsp544@kmu.ac.kr

Received 25 November 2012       Revised 23 April 2013       Accepted 23 April 2013

Copyright © 2013 Korean Society of Adult Nursing

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 develop a health promotion program for frail elderly nursing home residents, and to analyze the effects of the program.

Methods

The research was a nonequivalent control group pre-test-posttest design. Data collection was performed from February 26, 2012, to April 26, 2012. The subjects were 28 residents for the experimental group, who were selected at A nursing home, D city, in Korea and 27 residents for the control group, who were selected at B nursing home. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, x2-test, independent t-test, ANCOVA and Cronbach's ⍺ with SPSS/Win 17.0 program.

Results

There was a significant improvement in health promoting behaviors (F=64.26, p<.001), Lt. Grip strength (F=39.76, p<.001), Rt. Grip strength (F=38.06, p<.001), Static balance (F=3.98, p =.050), TUG (F=18.60, p<.001), oral status (F=26.75, p<.001), depression (F=18.79, p<.001), and subjective health status (F=10.75, p<.002) in the treatment group compared to the comparison group.

Conclusion

The health promotion program improved the health promoting behavior, physical fitness, oral status, depression, and subjective health status of the frail elderly nursing home residents. Therefore, health promotion programs for frail elderly nursing home residents could be helpful.

Keywords: Frail elderly, Health promotion, Health status

References

Ahn C. S.2011. Customized visiting health service for visit rehabilitation: Frail elderly. Daejeon: Eulji University.
Byun Y. C.., Kim S. H.., Yoon S. Y.., Kwon S. J.., Cho H. S.., Cho S. Y., et al. 2006. A study of the characteristics of the person with disabilities based on the life cycle perspectives. Seoul: Korea Institute for Health and Social Affairs.
Cho M. J.., Bae J. N.., Suh G. H.., Hahm B. J.., Kim J. K.., Lee D. W., et al. 1999. Validation of geriatric depression scale, korean version (GDS) in the assessment of DSM-Ⅲ-R major depression. Journal of Korean Neuropsychiatry Association. 38:48–63.
Daniels R.., Rossum E.., Witt L.., Kempen G.., Heuvel W.2008. Interventions to prevent disability in frail community-dwelling elderly: A systemic review. BMC Health Service Research. 8:278–286.
crossref
Fried L. P.., Tangen C. M.., Walston J.., Newman A. B.., Hirsch C.., Gottdiener J., et al. 2001. Frailty in older adults: Evidence for a phenotype. The Journal of Gerontology Series A, Biological Sciences and Medical Sciences. 56:146–156.
crossref
Han A. K.., Won J. S.2000. The effect of rhythmical exercise program period on physiological improvements in the elderly. Journal of Korean Academy of Fundamental Nursing. 7:301–315.
Han Y. S.., Choi C. H.., Lee P. Y.2007. Development and effect of the customized health gymnastics program for the frail old. The Korean Journal of Physical Education. 46:595–606.
Hong Y. A.2003. The effect of health screening on health promotion behaviors in the elderly. Unpublished master's the-sis, Yonsei University, Seoul.
Jeon E. Y.., Kim K. B.2006. A study of factors that influence the promotion of healthy behavior in the elderly according to types of residency. Journal of Korean Academy of Nursing. 36:475–483.
crossref
Jung Y. M.2001. An effect of health promotion program on health in the elderly. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Hanyang University, Seoul.
Kim Y. J.., Choi Y. H.., Kim J. Y.., Lee H. K.2011. The effect of orophysical exercise for the elderly on oral function and nutrient intake. Journal of Korean Academy of Oral Health. 35:414–422.
Korea Institute of Health and Social Affairs. 2008. The operating guild of health promotion for frail elderly in HUB Public Health Center. Seoul: Author.
Korea National Statistical Office. 2011, December. 2011 Statistics on Korea-Census population. Retrieved November 24, 2012, from Korea National Statistical Office Website:. http://www.kostat.go.kr.
Kwon S. M.., Park J. S.2010. A comparison on frailty, health promotion behavior, and perceived health status in the elderly according to the type of residency. Journal of Agricultural Medicine & Community Health. 35:1–12.
Lawston M. P.., Moss M.., Fulcomer M.., Kleban M. H.1982. A research and service oriented multilevel assessment instrument. Journal of Gerontology. 37:91–99.
crossref
Lee K. R.2012. Efficacy of nutrition management program on performance ability, physical function, nutritional status in frail elderly. Unpublished master's thesis, Kyung Hee University, Seoul.
Ministry for Health, Welfare and Family Affairs. 2011. 2011 Customized visiting health service guidebook. Seoul: Author.
Park J. S.., Oh Y. J.2005. The effect of a heath promotion program in rural elderly on health promotion lifestyle and health status. Journal of Korean Academy of Nursing. 35:943–954.
Park M. H.., Ha J. C.., Shin I. H.., Kim H. G.., Lee S. Y.., Cho J. H., et al. 2009. 2008 Survey for the elderly-national living profiles and welfare service needs of older persons in Korea's survey. Seoul: Ministry of Health, Welfare, and Family Affairs & Keimyung University.
Park S. K.., Kwon Y. C.., Kim E. H.2007. The effect of combined exercise on self-reliance fitness, insulin resistance and blood pressure in frail elderly women. The Korean Journal of Physical Education. 45:369–380.
Park Y. I.2009. The effects of exercise in the frail elderly with chronic disease. Daejeon: Daejeon University.
Rockwood K.., Song X.., MacKnight C.., Bergman H.., Hogan D. B.., McDowell I., et al. 2005. A global clinical measure of fitness and frailty in elderly people. Canadian Medical Association Journal. 173:489–495.
crossref
Son H. H.., Kim K.2011. Effects of elderly gymnastic program on physical function in hospitalized frail people. Journal of the Korean Data Analysis Society. 13(1B):123–134.
Sung K. W.2005. Comparison of Health Conservation for Elders in Assisted Living Facilities and Nursing Homes. Journal of Korean Academy of Nursing. 35:1379–1389.
crossref
Sunwoo D.., Lee S. H.., Park J. S.., Bae S. S.., Cho Y. H.., Kim C. B., et al. 2008. Analysis of the effects of muscle strength exercise on physical function and quality of life in frail elderly. Korean Journal of Health Education and Promotion. 25(1):39–53.
Sunwoo D.., Song H. J.., Lee Y. H.., Kim D. J.2004. Study on development of health care service and coordinated system for frail elderly people. Seoul: Korea Institute for Health and Social Affairs.
Walker S. N.., Sechrist K. R.., Pender N. J.1987. The health- promoting lifestyle profile: Development and psychometric characteristics. Nursing Research. 36:76–81.
Winograd C. H.., Gerety M. B.., Chung M.., Goldstein M. K.., Dominguez F. Jr.., Vallone R.1991. Screening for frailty: Criteria and predictors of outcomes. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society. 39:778–784.
crossref
Wood N. F.., LaCroix A. Z.., Gray S. L.., Aragaki A.., Cochrane B. B.., Brunner R. L., et al. 2005. Frailty: Emergence and consequences in women aged 65 and older in the women's health initiative observational study. Journal of American Geriatrics Society. 53:1321–1330.
Yesavage J. A.., Brink T. L.., Rose T. L.., Lum O.., Huang V.., Adey M., et al. 1983. Development and validation of a geriatric depression screening scale: A preliminary report. Journal Psychiatric Research. 17:37–49.
crossref

Table 1.
Health Promotion Program for Frail Elderly Residents
Weeks Time Contents HPLP area
1 120 minutes Pretest Health responsibility
    Informed consent  
    Orientation  
2 90 minutes Senile diseases and drug management Health responsibility
    Low-intensity exercise Physical activity
3 90 minutes Group art therapy for self-esteem Self-actualization
    Low-intensity exercise Physical activity
4 90 minutes Nutrition education Nutrition
    Oral hygiene Physical activity
    Low-intensity exercise  
5 90 minutes A joyful old song contest: trot medley Stress management
    Low-intensity exercise Physical activity
6 90 minutes Self-reflection Self-actualization
    Low-intensity exercise Physical activity
7 90 minutes Interaction through team play therapy Interpersonal relations
    Low-intensity exercise Physical activity
8 120 minutes Low-intensity exercise Physical activity
    Posttest Interpersonal relations
    Peer group activity  

HPLP=health promoting lifestyle profile.

Table 3.
Comparison between Experimental and Control Group of Post HPLP
Variables Groups Pretest Posttest F† p
M±SD M±SD
HPLP: Total Exp. (n=28) 80.89±10.03 95.89±10.07 64.26 ＜.001
  Cont. (n=27) 80.44±10.92 77.03±9.22    
Health responsibility Exp. (n=28) 26.67±4.60 30.78±4.21 16.92 ＜.001
  Cont. (n=27) 28.59±4.68 27.62±4.35    
Physical activity Exp. (n=28) 4.25±1.62 5.25±1.17 20.57 ＜.001
  Cont. (n=27) 3.77±1.57 3.51±1.50    
Nutrition Exp. (n=28) 16.25±2.61 18.89±1.96 45.34 ＜.001
  Cont. (n=27) 15.55±2.60 14.85±2.42    
Interpersonal relations Exp. (n=28) 12.60±2.72 15.39±2.76 28.86 ＜.001
  Cont. (n=27) 11.66±2.96 10.81±2.90    
Self-actualization Exp. (n=28) 11.21±2.16 13.25±1.85 23.41 ＜.001
  Cont. (n=27) 11.70±2.21 10.81±2.46    
Stress management Exp. (n=28) 9.89±2.46 12.32±2.38 19.88 ＜.001
  Cont. (n=27) 9.14±2.17 9.40±1.78    

Exp.=experimental group; Cont.=control group; HPLP=health promoting lifestyle profile.

† F-value of ANCOVA with pretest value as covariate.

Table 4.
Comparison between Experimental and Control Group of Post Physiological Variables
Variables Groups Pretest Posttest F† p
M±SD M±SD
Left grip strength (kg) Exp. (n=28) 9.21±3.46 12.76±4.61 39.76 ＜.001
  Cont. (n=27) 8.13±3.81 7.07±2.88    
Right grip strength (kg) Exp. (n=28) 9.68±3.77 13.21±4.95 38.06 ＜.001
  Cont. (n=27) 7.84±2.69 7.21±2.52    
Static balance (sec) Exp. (n=28) 2.69±2.70 3.98±4.16 3.98 .050
  Cont. (n=27) 2.72±3.18 2.16±2.53    
Timed up and go (sec) Exp. (n=28) 16.48±4.54 14.93±3.78 18.60 ＜.001
  Cont. (n=27) 17.95±4.75 19.70±5.92    
Oral status Exp. (n=28) 7.42±1.10 9.14±1.11 26.75 ＜.001
  Cont. (n=27) 7.00±1.30 7.25±1.37    

Exp.=experimental group; Cont.=control group.

† F-value of ANCOVA with pretest value as covariate.

Table 5.
Comparison of Post Depression and Perceived Health Status between Experimental and Control Group
Variables Groups Pretest Posttest F† p
M±SD M±SD
Depression Exp. (n=28) 5.96±3.58 4.03±3.42 18.79 ＜.001
  Cont. (n=27) 6.92±3.19 8.33±3.22    
Perceived health status Exp. (n=28) 8.35±2.21 9.82±1.38 10.75 .002
  Cont. (n=27) 7.77±2.45 7.92±2.12    

Exp.=Experimental group; Cont.=Control group.

† F-value of ANCOVA with pretest value as covariate.

Table 2.
Homogeneity of General Characteristics and Dependent Variable between Experimental and Control Group
Characteristics Categories Total (n=55) Exp. (n=28) Cont. (n=27) x2 or t p
n (%) or M±SD n (%) or M±SD n (%) or M±SD
Gender Male 7 (12.7) 4 (14.3) 3 (11.1) 0.12 .724
  Female 48 (87.3) 24 (85.7) 24 (88.9)    
Age (year) 65∼69 2 (3.6) 2 (7.1) 0 (0.0) 2.95 .398
  70∼79 19 (34.5) 11 (39.3) 8 (29.6)    
  80∼89 32 (58.2) 14 (50.0) 18 (66.7)    
  ≥90 2 (3.6) 1 (3.6) 1 (3.7)    
Education None 35 (63.6) 16 (57.1) 19 (70.4) 1.48 .475
  Elementary school 16 (29.1) 9 (32.1) 7 (25.9)    
  ≥ Middle school 4 (7.3) 3 (10.7) 1 (3.7)    
Religion Buddhism 19 (34.5) 7 (25.0) 12 (44.4) 3.97 .410
  Protestant 8 (14.5) 6 (21.4) 2 (7.4)    
  Catholic 7 (12.7) 3 (10.7) 4 (14.8)    
  None 17 (30.9) 10 (35.7) 7 (25.9)    
  Other 4 (7.3) 2 (7.1) 2 (7.4)    
Marital status Single 6 (10.9) 3 (10.7) 3 (11.1) 4.42 .351
  Married 3 (5.5) 3 (10.7) 0 (0.0)    
  Divorce 4 (7.3) 3 (10.7) 1 (3.7)    
  Bereavement 37 (67.3) 17 (60.7) 20 (74.1)    
  Other 5 (9.1) 2 (7.1) 3 (11.1)    
Length of the stay of 49 25 (45.5) 17 (60.7) 8 (29.6) 7.70 .103
facility (month) 50∼69 10 (18.2) 4 (14.3) 6 (22.2)    
  70∼99 10 (18.2) 2 (7.1) 8 (29.6)    
  ≥100 7 (12.7) 3 (10.7) 4 (14.8)    
Entrance motive Heath problem 30 (54.5) 13 (46.4) 17 (63.0) 2.43 .295
  No dependents 12 (21.8) 6 (21.4) 6 (22.2)    
  Economic problem 13 (23.6) 9 (32.1) 4 (14.8)    
The number of Zero 2 (3.6) 1 (3.6) 1 (3.7) 1.19 .754
disease One 21 (38.2) 10 (35.7) 11 (40.7)    
  Two 24 (43.6) 14 (50.0) 10 (37.0)    
  ≥ Three 8 (14.5) 3 (10.7) 5 (18.5)    
Satisfaction of Bad 6 (10.9) 5 (17.9) 1 (3.7) 2.83 .242
facility Not bad 19 (34.5) 9 (32.1) 10 (37.0)    
  Good 30 (54.5) 14 (50.0) 16 (59.3)    
HPLP Total 80.67±10.38 80.89±10.03 80.44±10.92 0.15 .875
Grip strength Left hand 8.68±3.64 9.21±3.46 8.13±3.81 1.09 .278
  Right hand 8.78±3.38 9.68±3.77 7.88±2.69 2.07 .043
Static balance   2.70±2.92 2.69±2.70 2.72±3.18 –0.03 .972
Timed up and go   17.20±4.66 16.48±4.54 17.95±4.75 –1.17 .244
Oral status   7.21±1.21 7.42±1.10 7.00±1.30 1.31 .193
Depression   6.43±3.40 5.96±3.58 6.92±3.19 –1.04 .299
Perceived health status   8.07±2.33 8.35±2.21 7.77±2.45 0.92 .362

Exp.=experimental group; Cont.=control group; HPLP=health promoting lifestyle profile.

TOOLS
Similar articles