1 / 29

Overview of CCPHE projects

Multi-method findings of a participatory approach to developing preventative health tools for BC individuals with incarceration experience CPHA, Toronto 28 th May, 2014. Overview of CCPHE projects. P4H -Vancouver Foundation , January/11 – January/14

ira
Télécharger la présentation

Overview of CCPHE projects

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Multi-method findings of a participatory approach to developing preventative health tools for BC individuals with incarceration experience CPHA, Toronto 28th May, 2014

  2. Overview of CCPHE projects P4H -Vancouver Foundation, January/11 – January/14 • Preventive health: Cancer, HIV/AIDS, Hepatitis C, Mental Health, Addiction • Men and women with incarceration experience enrolled in Greater Vancouver area. P4C- Public Health Agency of Canada,April/12 – March/14 • Prevention and screening of breast, cervicaland colon cancers • Men and women with incarceration experience enrolled in twogeographical locations: Greater Vancouver area and Nanaimo.

  3. Prison Participatory Preventive Health Project (P4H) OVERALL GOALS: • Goal 1: To use participatory approaches to develop preventive health tools, and methods of evaluation, for men and women with incarceration experience • Goal 2: To pilot preventive health tools/programs, developed using participatory approaches, among men and women with incarceration experience. • Goal 3: To promote the uptake and evaluation by health and correctional organizations of successfully piloted preventive health tools/programs.

  4. Prison Participatory Cancer Prevention Project (P4C) OVERALL GOAL: Promote participation in cancer screening and early detection among individuals with incarceration experience (IIE) in BC. • Inclusive participation of individuals with incarceration experience (IIE) throughout the project’s entirety. • Increased trust between health care practitioners (HCP) and individuals with incarceration experience (IIE). • Acceptable, accessible and available self-advocacy, peer support and cancer screening tools for individuals with incarceration experience (IIE). • Increased knowledge of barriers to cancer screening for IIE, and increased knowledge of participatory action research processes. • Increased feasibility of uptake of self-advocacy, self-management, peer support and cancer screening programs nationally and with correctional institutions.

  5. Guiding ValuesDeveloped collaboratively by Project Advisory Committee members Partnership Equal participation of all relevant stakeholders Voice Encourage all people to share their opinions and ideas Active Listening Hear what others have to say Respect Acknowledge that everyone has something to offer Reciprocal Learning Learn from one another Cultural Safety No judgement Transparency Honesty and accountability in all actions

  6. Iceberg Analogy of Health Priorities and their Underlying Causes

  7. What we did • Hired project coordinators • Hired project assistants with incarceration experience • UBC Research Ethics Board certificates • Enrolled and consented 183 participants with incarceration experience: • 107 Greater Vancouver • 76 Nanaimo • Participants invited to (develop), pilot and evaluate preventive health tools and workshops

  8. Multi-Method Evaluationconsensus - all members of project team • Workshop evaluation • Number of workshops (&, numbers of participants) • Post-workshop satisfaction surveys (Likert scales) • Focus group discussions with workshop participants • Open ended questions (e.g. Tell us how you think this workshop would work inside prison?What aspects would you change?) • Pre- and post- project surveys • Changes in participant health knowledge, attitudes and practices over the duration of the project

  9. Additional Evaluation • Participant narratives • “Tell us about the experience of participating in this project” • Members of the Project Team, including the Project Advisory Committee (PAC) • Shared their reflections about their own learning processes • Health Care Practitioners • Pre- and post- Knowledge and Attitudes survey for documentary viewers

  10. Data Collection and Analysis • Qualitative Data: Audio-recordings transcribed verbatim, identifiers removed. NVivoTM10 used to organize the data. Interpretative Descriptionanalysis approach (S. Thorne). Coded, placed into categories, generated overall themes. • Quotes selected to illuminate the major themes. • Quantitative Data: survey data entered into Fluid Survey software and exported to SASS. Descriptive statistics were used, with tests of association: • Categorical variables: Chi-square (or , Fisher's exact test if cell size <=5). • Ordinal variables: Wilcoxon's 2-sample test. • Continuous variables: t-test. Tests results with p-value <0.05 statistically significant. Test results with p-value 0.05 – 0.1 approach statistical significance

  11. Preventive Health Workshops Activities: Facebook Group Cancer feedback session Activity: barriers to being healthy Reminder cards and poster Marnie’s Health Tips Memo-to-Myself Navigating the Health Care System Cancer Prevention HIV Finding Our Voices C E H T P C Cancer Screening Hepatitis C C E P M C Mental Health C E P Community Organization Health Care Provider Peer-led Academic expert Multimedia Experiential Learning Interactive theatre activity C A P P M H P Addiction A P H C M E T

  12. Preventive Health Workshop Evaluation Satisfaction Likert Surveys

  13. Preventive Health Workshop Evaluation Focus Group Findings Cancer prevention workshop focus groups(n=41) reported here. Three themes emerged.

  14. Workshop Logistics and Structure • Variety • “Switching it up a bit and having different people doing it in different ways helped to keep me paying attention ‘cause I’ll lose focus really quickly” -Vancouver participant • Peer-led learning • “It’s not something you just learned out of a textbook alright. It’s actual life experiences that people are talking about.” -Vancouver participant • Recommendations • More time for sharing information: “I learn the most and digest the most information when there’s questions and discussions” -Vancouver participant

  15. Health Outcomes • Control • “The biggest thing I learned is that I am in control of my own destiny…when it comes to your health and everything, that’s solely me.” –Vancouver participant • Information sharing • “just to remind your friends, especially if they’re getting into their like 50s that all the screening, whether for male issues or female issues, to go get the screens and you know, save their life type thing” –Nanaimo participant • Goal-setting • “I’m going to be drinking less pop. I have high blood pressure, and it’s not good to have too much sugar for me.” –Nanaimo participant • “I could do more walking you know, and to start out with, cut back on my smoking till I do quit right.” –Vancouver participant

  16. Workshops Inside Prisons • Content • Most common suggestion was dietary information: “People who are in and out of prison, on that revolving door, are being exposed to unhealthy food and that’s the kind of habits you pick up when you come out because, you don’t know any better, right?” -Vancouver participant • Relevance • “I think it’ll be really helpful to people inside, just to hear the same information that I just heard, cause it meant something to me and I have been in the same situation.” -Vancouver participant • Structure • Ideal to have combination of peer educators and professionals: “Peer-based, peer-led is really important…when I was younger I wouldn’t listen to anybody seriously if it wasn’t somebody my age who had a similar experience” -Vancouver participant “In a prison setting, they don’t always take their peers seriously, so it might help to have the professionals to back up what they are saying.” -Vancouver participant

  17. Pre- and Post- project participant survey findings (Canadian Community Health Survey items, when possible) • 6-item demographic survey (age, education, employment, gender, ethnicity, housing, etc.) • 70-item survey about preventive health • 25-item survey about diet and exercise • 11-item survey about experiences with HCP • 13-item survey about cervical cancer • 17-item survey about breast cancer • 19-item survey about colorectal cancer

  18. Participant Demographics

  19. Participant Demographics

  20. Participants who completed post- project surveys • A total of 58 (32%) participants completed post-project surveys (and, pre-project surveys) • Participants who resided in institutions/recovery houses/halfway houses at baseline were less likely to complete post-project surveys • Participants who completed post-project surveys: • older • out of custody for longer • more likely to be from Nanaimo

  21. Changes in hepatitis knowledge (n=58) • Hepatitis consists of an inflammation of your liver. ‘True’ 74% -> 100% (p=0.0463) • Would you know where to go in your neighbourhood to see a health care professional regarding hepatitis related health issues? ‘Yes’ 79% -> 100% (p=0.1050)

  22. Changes in preventive health practices (n=58) • Not counting carrots, potatoes or salad, how often do you usually eat other vegetables? (p=0.0107) • How often do you usually eat potatoes, not including french fries, fried potatoes, or potato chips? (p=0.0581) • In a typical month over the past year, how often have you participated in mod/strenuous activity? (p=0.0445) • In a typical week in the past 3 months, how many hours did you usually spend walking to work, school or doing errands? (p=0.0713)

  23. Changes in knowledge and beliefs about cervical screening • All women who have ever been sexually active (touchingor intercourse) are at risk of cervical cancer? ‘True’ 20% -> 70% (p=0.0698) • You are more likely to develop cervical cancer if you have (or had) multiple partners or if you became sexually active at an early age. ‘True’ 20% -> 70% (p=0.0698)

  24. Changes in knowledge and beliefs about colorectal screening (n=58) • These tests (FOBT and FIT) are painful and take a long time. ‘False’ 29% -> 64% (p=0.0029) • If I don’t have symptoms, I do not need to have colorectal cancer screening done. ‘False’ 66% -> 92% (p=0.0093) • All men and women 50 to 74 years should be  screenedfor colorectal cancer regularly. ‘True’ 67% ->92% (p=0.0182) • People get colorectal cancer because they have lived a bad  life. ‘False’ 74% -> 92% (p=0.0632)

  25. Thank you Questions? Email: prison.research@familymed.ubc.ca Phone: 604-827-4976 www.facebook.com/CCPHE.UBC @ccpheUBC

More Related