» Articles » PMID: 21603049

Health Promotion Activity in Primary Care: Performance of Models and Associated Factors

Overview
Journal Open Med
Date 2011 May 24
PMID 21603049
Citations 25
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Lifestyle behaviours have significant health and economic consequences. Primary care providers play an important role in promoting healthy behaviours. We compared the performance of primary care models in delivering health promotion and identified practice factors associated with its delivery.

Methods: Surveys were conducted in 137 randomly selected primary care practices in 4 primary care models in Ontario, Canada: 35 community health centres, 35 fee-for-service practices, 35 family health networks and 32 health service organizations. A total of 4861 adult patients who were visiting their family practice participated in the study. Qualitative nested case studies were also conducted at 2 practices per model. A 7-item question was used to evaluate health promotion. The main outcome was whether at least 1 of the 7 health promotion items was discussed at the survey visit. Multilevel logistic regressions were used to compare the models and determine performance-related practice factors.

Results: The rate of health promotion was significantly higher in community health centres than in the other models (the unadjusted difference ranged between 8% and 13%). This finding persisted after controlling for patient and family physician profiles. Factors independently positively associated with health promotion were as follows: reason for visit (for a general checkup: adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 3.34, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.81-3.97; for care for a chronic disease: AOR 2.03, 95% CI 1.69-2.43), patients having and seeing their own provider (for those not: AOR 0.58, 95% CI 0.43-0.78), number of nurses in the practice (AOR 1.07, 95% CI 1.02-1.12), percentage of female family physicians (AOR 1.38, 95% CI 1.15-1.66), smaller physician panel size (AOR 0.92, 95% CI 0.85-1.01) and longer booking interval (AOR 1.03, 95% CI 1.01-1.04). Providers in interdisciplinary practices viewed health promotion as an integral part of primary care, whereas other providers emphasized the role of relational continuity in effective health promotion.

Conclusion: We have identified several attributes associated with health promotion delivery. These results may assist practice managers and policy-makers in modifying practice attributes to improve health promotion in primary care.

Citing Articles

Determining Patient Panel Size in Primary Care: A Meta-Narrative Review.

Abu Dabrh A, Farah W, McLeod H, Biazar P, Mohabbat A, Munipalli B J Prim Care Community Health. 2025; 16:21501319251321294.

PMID: 39976555 PMC: 11843711. DOI: 10.1177/21501319251321294.


Professional beliefs of physicians and allied health professionals and their willingness to promote health in primary care: a cross-sectional survey.

Brandt S, Essig S, Balthasar A BMC Prim Care. 2024; 25(1):188.

PMID: 38802787 PMC: 11129482. DOI: 10.1186/s12875-024-02412-6.


Analysis of Variation in Organizational Definitions of Primary Care Panels: A Systematic Review.

Mayo-Smith M, Robbins R, Murray M, Weber R, Bagley P, Vitale E JAMA Netw Open. 2022; 5(4):e227497.

PMID: 35426924 PMC: 9012968. DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2022.7497.


Workload and patterns of care in the Timmins Family Health Team in Ontario.

Farmer R, Patel R Can Fam Physician. 2021; 67(5):e121-e129.

PMID: 33980641 PMC: 8115966. DOI: 10.46747/cfp.6705e121.


Evaluation of Rheumatology Workforce Supply Changes in Ontario, Canada, from 2000 to 2030.

Widdifield J, Bernatsky S, Pope J, Kuriya B, Barber C, Eder L Healthc Policy. 2021; 16(3):119-134.

PMID: 33720829 PMC: 7957360. DOI: 10.12927/hcpol.2021.26428.


References
1.
Safran D, Miller W, Beckman H . Organizational dimensions of relationship-centered care. Theory, evidence, and practice. J Gen Intern Med. 2006; 21 Suppl 1:S9-15. PMC: 1484831. DOI: 10.1111/j.1525-1497.2006.00303.x. View

2.
Finkelstein E, Fiebelkorn I, Wang G . National medical spending attributable to overweight and obesity: how much, and who's paying?. Health Aff (Millwood). 2003; Suppl Web Exclusives:W3-219-26. DOI: 10.1377/hlthaff.w3.219. View

3.
Campbell S, Hann M, Hacker J, Burns C, Oliver D, Thapar A . Identifying predictors of high quality care in English general practice: observational study. BMJ. 2001; 323(7316):784-7. PMC: 57358. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.323.7316.784. View

4.
Saultz J, Lochner J . Interpersonal continuity of care and care outcomes: a critical review. Ann Fam Med. 2005; 3(2):159-66. PMC: 1466859. DOI: 10.1370/afm.285. View

5.
Weingarten S . Using practice guideline compendiums to provide better preventive care. Ann Intern Med. 1999; 130(5):454-8. DOI: 10.7326/0003-4819-130-5-199903020-00023. View