Document Type : Original Article
Authors
- . Yogesh Kumar Jain 1
- . Nitin Kumar Joshi 1
- . Pankaj Bhardwaj 2
- . Kuldeep Singh 3
- . Praveen Suthar 1
- . Vibha Joshi 4
1 School of Public Health, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Jodhpur, Rajasthan, India
2 Department of Community Medicine and Family Medicine and School of Public Health, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Jodhpur, Rajasthan, India,
3 Department of Paediatrics and School of Public Health, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Jodhpur, Rajasthan, India
4 Resource Center Health Technology Assessment, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Jodhpur, Rajasthan, India
Abstract
BACKGROUND: There is a lack of organized effort in the arena of school health promotion, which
has been recognized as an effective approach to combat the growing incidence of communicable
and noncommunicable diseases. With this view, a study was conducted to develop comprehensive
and replicable model for health promotion in schools.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The Knowledge to Action (KTA) framework recognized by the World
Health Organization as an implementational framework was used in an implementation study in
a school of urban Jodhpur to assess the challenges and gaps associated with health promotion
interventions in the school. Baseline regarding knowledge application and practices was gathered
using interviews with school staff, parents, and group interaction with students. Knowledge synthesis
was done by a thorough search of available literature and the gathered baseline. Resource mapping
was carried out using checklists developed from knowledge synthesis. Tailor‑made tools were
constructed for knowledge implementation for each component of the action cycle. Knowledge of
facts related to health behaviors among students was evaluated using pre‑ and postquestionnaires
and practical application of knowledge was assessed using a checklist of 28 indicators on a 5‑point
Likert scale. Values of tests were gathered and compared with test values 3 and 6 months after the
implementation of tailored interventions using descriptive and inferential statistics.
RESULTS: Increase in correct answers by students (42% to 96%) and average response for
indicators on the Likert scale (3.23–4.86) was seen on repeated interventions over 6 months. Tobacco
consumption by school staff reduced by 20% and an increase in willingness among teachers was
observed on follow‑up interviews.
CONCLUSION: The study thus developed a model for health promotion in a school with the help of
the KTA framework using tailored interventions that could further be evolved in other setups based
on local needs and available resources.
Keywords
Consensus, strategies, and potential. Health Educ 2014;114:170‑85.
2. Kolbe LJ. School health as a strategy to improve both public health
and education. Annu Rev Public Health 2019;40:443‑63.
3. Khurana C, Priya H, Kharbanda OP, Bhadauria US, Das D, Ravi P,
et al. Effectiveness of an oral health training program for school
teachers in India: An interventional study. J Educ Health Promot
2020;9:98.
4. Raj U, Naik PR, Nirgude A. Schoolchild as a health educator for
parents regarding hypertension: Aquasi‑experimental study among
school students of South India. J Educ Health Promot 2020;9:74.
5. JainYK, Joshi NK, Bhardwaj P, Suthar P. Health‑promoting school
in India: Approaches and challenges. J Family Med Prim Care
2019;8:3114‑9.
6. Field B, Booth A, Ilott I, Gerrish K. Using the Knowledge to Action
Framework in practice: A citation analysis and systematic review.
Implement Sci 2014;9:172.
7. Bjørk I, Lomborg K, Nielsen C, Brynildsen G, Frederiksen A,
Larsen K, et al. From theoretical model to practical use: An
example of knowledge translation. J Adv Nurs 2013;69:2336‑47.
8. Stacey D, Higuchi KA, Menard P, Davies B, Graham ID,
O’Connor AM. Integrating patient decision support in an
undergraduate nursing curriculum: An implementation project.
Int J Nurs Educ Scholarsh 2009;6(1):Article10.
9. Claude KM, Juvenal KL, Hawkes M. Applying a
knowledge‑to‑action framework for primary prevention of spina
bifida in tropical Africa. Matern Child Nutr 2012;8:174‑84.
10. HuaD, CarterS, Bellerive J, AlluS, ReidD, TremblayG, et al. Bridging
the gap: Innovative knowledge translation and the Canadian
hypertension education program. Can J Cardiol 2012;28:258‑61.
11. The Knowledge‑to‑Action Framework. Medium; 2017.
Available from: https://medium.com/knowledgenudge/
kt‑101‑the‑knowledge‑to‑action‑framework‑7fbe399723e8. [Last
accessed on 2020 Aug 29].
12. Concepts: System Perspective – New England Complex Systems
Institute. New England Complex Systems Institute; 2011.
Available from: https://necsi.edu/system‑perspective. [Last
accessed on 2020 Aug 29].
13. Regional Guidelines: Development of Health‑Promoting Schools–A
Framework for Action. World Health Organization – Regional
Office for the Western Pacific. Available from: https://apps.who.
int/iris/handle/10665/206847. [Last accessed on 2020 Aug 29].
14. Niranjan V, Gamboa A. Assessing health promotion activities
through school head master’s perspectives: Cross sectional
descriptive study of CBSE schools in India. Eur J Pharm Med Res
2017;4:366‑70.
15. KaurJ, Saini SK, Bharti B, Surinder K. Health promotion facilities
in schools: WHO “Health promoting schools initiative.” Nurs
Midwifery Res J 2015;11:103‑11.
16. Local Action: Creating Health Promoting Schools. World Health
Organization. Available from: https://apps.who.int/iris/
handle/10665/66576. [Last accessed on 2020 Aug 29].
17. World Health Organization. Global Status Report on Noncommunicable
Diseases 2014. World Health Organization; 2014. Available from:
https://apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/148114. [Last accessed
on 2020 Aug 29].
18. Leger LS, Kolbe L, Lee A, McCall DS, Young IM. School
health promotion. In: McQueen DV, Jones CM, editors. Global
Perspectives on Health Promotion Effectiveness. New York, NY:
Springer; 2007.
19. Booth ML, Samdal O. Health‑promoting schools in Australia:
models and measurement. Aust N Z J Public Health 1997;21:365‑70.
20. Deschesnes M, Martin C, Hill AJ. Comprehensive approaches to
school health promotion: How to achieve broader implementation?
Health Promot Int 2003;18:387‑96.
21. Langford R, Bonell C, Jones H, Pouliou T, Murphy S, Waters E,
et al. The WHO Health Promoting School framework for
improving the health and well‑being of students and their
academic achievement. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2014; Issue
4. Art. No.: CD008958 [doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD008958.pub2].
22. Buddeberg‑Fischer B, Klaghofer R, Reed V, Buddeberg C.
Unterrichtsmodule zur Gesundheitsförderung. Ergebnisse einer
kontrollierten Interventionsstudie an zwei Gymnasien[Curriculum
module for health promotion. Results of a controlled intervention
study in 2 high schools]. Soz Praventivmed 2000;45:191-202.
23. Haleem A, Khan MK, Sufia S, Chaudhry S, Siddiqui MI, Khan AA.
The role of repetition and reinforcement in school‑based oral
health education – A cluster randomized controlled trial. BMC
Public Health 2016;16:2.
)