RESUMO
Objetivo Analizar las líneas de acción propuestas por los proyectos de promoción de la salud participantes en el proyecto de investigación EvaluAGPS, y su relación con las puntuaciones obtenidas con EvalGuía, una herramienta para evaluar la participación comunitaria basada en la evidencia. Diseño Estudio multicéntrico cuali-cuantitativo. Emplazamiento Proyectos de atención primaria o de red intersectorial de atención primaria y municipalidades de 5 comunidades autónomas en España. Participantes Personas que trabajan en 10 proyectos de promoción de la salud, seleccionados con muestreo intencional según criterios de inclusión (proyectos con un mínimo de participación comunitaria centrados en la salud comunitaria). Método Se recogieron los datos mediante cuestionarios (herramienta EvalGuía) y talleres participativos. Los datos cuantitativos se analizaron con estadística descriptiva, los datos cualitativos se analizaron utilizando el análisis de matriz. Resultados Tras pasar la herramienta EvalGuía, las puntuaciones más bajas estaban en la evaluación de resultados, conocimiento de leyes relacionadas con participación comunitaria, diversidad en el grupo motor, medidas de conciliación, recursos financieros y devolución de resultados. Las líneas de acción planteadas eran heterogéneas y no siempre coinciden con las priorizadas. Las líneas priorizadas giraban en torno a la organización del proyecto y a la comunicación. Conclusiones La herramienta EvalGuía puede ser útil para diseñar planes de acción en proyectos de promoción de la salud. La implementación de medidas en 12 meses para aumentar la diversidad del grupo motor, incorporar medidas de conciliación o mejorar la evaluación es difícil. Se requiere más tiempo para implementar este tipo de medidas. (AU)
Objective To analyse the lines of action identified in the health promotion projects participating in the EvaluA GPS research, and their relationship with the scores assigned in EvalGuia, a tool for evaluating evidence-based community participation. Design Qualitative-quantitative multicentre study. Setting Primary care or intersectoral network of primary care and municipalities in five autonomous communities in Spain. Participants Participants of 10 health promotion projects, selected with convenience sampling, following inclusion criteria (projects with a minimum of community engagement and centred on community health). Method Data were collected through questionnaires (EvalGuía tool) and participatory workshops. Quantitative data were analysed with descriptive statistics, qualitative data were analysed using matrix analysis. Results After implementing the EvalGuide tool, the lowest scores were assigned in outcome evaluation, knowledge of policies related to community participation, diversity in the core working group, inclusivity policies, financial resources and diffusion of results. The lines of action proposed were heterogeneous and did not always match with those prioritised as lower score. The prioritised lines revolved around project organisation and communication. Conclusions The EvalGuide tool can be helpful to design action plans in Health Promotion projects. The implementation of measures in 12 months to increase the diversity of the core working group, to incorporate worklife balance measures or to improve evaluation is difficult. More time is needed to implement such measures. (AU)
Assuntos
Humanos , Promoção da Saúde/métodos , Promoção da Saúde/normas , Saúde Pública , Atenção Primária à Saúde , Inquéritos e Questionários , EspanhaRESUMO
OBJECTIVE: To analyse the lines of action identified in the health promotion projects participating in the EvaluA GPS research, and their relationship with the scores assigned in EvalGuia, a tool for evaluating evidence-based community participation. DESIGN: Qualitative-quantitative multicentre study. SETTING: Primary care or intersectoral network of primary care and municipalities in five autonomous communities in Spain. PARTICIPANTS: Participants of 10 health promotion projects, selected with convenience sampling, following inclusion criteria (projects with a minimum of community engagement and centred on community health). METHOD: Data were collected through questionnaires (EvalGuía tool) and participatory workshops. Quantitative data were analysed with descriptive statistics, qualitative data were analysed using matrix analysis. RESULTS: After implementing the EvalGuide tool, the lowest scores were assigned in outcome evaluation, knowledge of policies related to community participation, diversity in the core working group, inclusivity policies, financial resources and diffusion of results. The lines of action proposed were heterogeneous and did not always match with those prioritised as lower score. The prioritised lines revolved around project organisation and communication. CONCLUSIONS: The EvalGuide tool can be helpful to design action plans in Health Promotion projects. The implementation of measures in 12 months to increase the diversity of the core working group, to incorporate work-life balance measures or to improve evaluation is difficult. More time is needed to implement such measures.
Assuntos
Participação da Comunidade , Promoção da Saúde , Humanos , Promoção da Saúde/métodos , Promoção da Saúde/organização & administração , Espanha , Atenção Primária à Saúde/organização & administração , Inquéritos e QuestionáriosRESUMO
OBJECTIVE: To describe how a sample of people working in community health promotion projects perceive and implement community engagement approaches. METHOD: Mixed qualitative-quantitative study. Data was collected through: semi-structured interviews with 10 people representing the projects, and workshops in which 53 people participated and responded to a questionnaire prepared ad hoc to identify levels of community engagement. Descriptive statistical analysis of the questionnaires and framework analysis of the interviews, observations and workshops recordings. RESULTS: Although the projects are described as highly participatory, community engagement appeared mainly in the form of attending events, with few examples of consultation or community involvement. CONCLUSIONS: This difference may be due to the lack of a culture of participation, both in individuals and institutions, and lack of training in community engagement. It is proposed to change the language from participation-attendance to using expressions such as consulting or involving people.
Assuntos
Participação da Comunidade , Relatório de Pesquisa , Humanos , Encaminhamento e Consulta , Pesquisa Qualitativa , Inquéritos e QuestionáriosRESUMO
INTRODUCTION: The EVALUA GPS project aims to evaluate the impact of the implementation of the National Institute for Health Care and Excellence (NICE) guideline 'Community engagement: improving health and well-being and reducing health inequalities' adapted to the Spanish context. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Phase I: A tool will be designed to evaluate the impact of implementing the recommendations of the adapted NICE guideline. The tool will be developed through a review of the literature on implementation of public health guidelines between 2000 and 2021 and an expert's panel consensus. PHASE II: The developed tool will be implemented in 16 community-based programmes, acting as intervention sites, and 4 controls through a quasi-experimental pre-post study. Phase III: A final online web tool, based on all previously collected information, will be developed to support the implementation of the adapted NICE guidelines recommendations in other contexts and programmes. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Data will be collected through surveys and semistructured interviews. Quantitative and qualitative data will be analysed to identify implementation scenarios, changes in community engagement approaches, and barriers and facilitators to the implementation of the recommendations. All this information will be further synthesised to develop the online tool. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The proposed research has been approved by the Clinical Research Ethics Committee of Aragon. Results will be presented at national and international conferences and published in peer-reviewed open access journals. The interactive online tool (phase III) will include examples of its application from the fieldwork.
Assuntos
Participação da Comunidade , Guias como Assunto , Saúde Pública , Humanos , Literatura de Revisão como AssuntoRESUMO
Objetivo: Describir qué entienden por participación comunitaria las personas que trabajan en 10 proyectos de promoción de la salud y cómo se implementa. Método: Estudio mixto cuali-cuantitativo. Se recopilaron datos mediante entrevistas semiestructuradas a 10 personas representantes de los proyectos, y se realizaron talleres presenciales en los que participaron 53 personas que contestaron a un cuestionario elaborado ad hoc para identificar los niveles de participación comunitaria. Análisis estadístico descriptivo de los cuestionarios y análisis de matriz de las entrevistas, observaciones y grabaciones de los talleres. Resultados: Aunque los proyectos se definen como muy participativos, la participación se manifiesta principalmente como asistencia, con escasos ejemplos de consulta o implicación real de la comunidad. Conclusiones: La discrepancia observada puede deberse a una falta de cultura de participación de individuos e instituciones, y a falta de formación. Se propone dejar de hablar de participación-asistencia y hacerlo de consultar o involucrar a las personas.(AU)
Objective: To describe how a sample of people working in community health promotion projects perceive and implement community engagement approaches. Method: Mixed qualitativequantitative study. Data was collected through: semi-structured interviews with 10 people representing the projects, and workshops in which 53 people participated and responded to a questionnaire prepared ad hoc to identify levels of community engagement. Descriptive statistical analysis of the questionnaires and framework analysis of the interviews, observations and workshops recordings. Results: Although the projects are described as highly participatory, community engagement appeared mainly in the form of attending events, with few examples of consultation or community involvement. Conclusions: This difference may be due to the lack of a culture of participation, both in individuals and institutions, and lack of training in community engagement. It is proposed to change the language from participation-attendance to using expressions such as consulting or involving people.(UA)
Assuntos
Humanos , Masculino , Feminino , Promoção da Saúde , Participação da Comunidade , Planejamento em Saúde Comunitária , Inquéritos e Questionários , Epidemiologia DescritivaRESUMO
OBJECTIVES: Over the past decade, increasing attention has been paid to community engagement in health (CEH) across Europe. This study aimed to identify and review CEH interventions to promote health and reduce inequalities within the Spanish context and the key facilitators for these community processes. METHODS: A systematic search in six databases, followed by a forward citation search, was conducted to identify implementation literature on CEH in Spain. Articles were included when engagement occurred in at least two stages of the interventions and was not limited to information or consultation of stakeholders. RESULTS: A total of 2023 results were identified; 50 articles were reviewed full text. Five articles were finally selected for inclusion. Data were extracted on various factors including details of the interventions, results achieved, stakeholders involved and their relationships. A narrative synthesis was performed to present results and support the discussion. CONCLUSIONS: Three main points are discussed: the role of professionals and citizens in CEH interventions, providing training to enable a reorientation towards a CEH practice and the relevance of contexts as enablers for community engagement processes to thrive.
