A qualitative assessment of multi-level nutrition strategies for reducing racial and ethnic disparities in diabetes

The purpose of this study is to examine the stages of program realization of the interventions that the Bronx Health REACH program initiated at various levels to improve nutrition as a means for reducing racial and ethnic disparities in diabetes. This study was based on secondary analyses of qualitative data collected through the Bronx Health REACH Nutrition Project, a project conducted under the auspices of the Institute on Urban Family Health, with support from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Local human subjects' review and approval through the Institute on Urban Family Health was required and obtained in order to conduct the Bronx Health REACH Nutrition Project. ^ The study drew from two theoretical models—Glanz and colleagues' nutrition environments model and Shediac-Rizkallah and Bone's sustainability model. The specific study objectives were two-fold: (1) to categorize each nutrition activity to a specific dimension (i.e. consumer, organizational or community nutrition environment); and (2) to evaluate the stage at which the program has been realized (i.e. development, implementation or sustainability). ^ A case study approach was applied and a constant comparative method was used to analyze the data. Triangulation of data based was also conducted. Qualitative data from this study revealed the following principal findings: (1) communities of color are disproportionately experiencing numerous individual and environmental factors contributing to the disparities in diabetes; (2) multi-level strategies that targeted the individual, organizational and community nutrition environments can appropriately address these contributing factors; (3) the nutrition strategies greatly varied in their ability to appropriately meet criteria for the three program stages; and (4) those nutrition strategies most likely to succeed (a) conveyed consistent and culturally relevant messages, (b) had continued involvement from program staff and partners, (c) were able to adapt over time or setting, (d) had a program champion and a training component, (e) were integrated into partnering organizations, and (f) were perceived to be successful by program staff and partners in their efforts to create individual, organizational and community/policy change. As a result of the criteria-based assessment and qualitative findings, an ecological framework elaborating on Glanz and colleagues model was developed. The qualitative findings and the resulting ecological framework developed from this study will help public health professionals and community leaders to develop and implement sustainable multi-level nutrition strategies for addressing racial and ethnic disparities in diabetes. ^

A multi-site pilot test study to measure safety climate in the university work setting

Next to leisure, sport, and household activities, the most common activity resulting in medically consulted injuries and poisonings in the United States is work, with an estimated 4 million workplace related episodes reported in 2008 (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2009). To address the risks inherent to various occupations, risk management programs are typically put in place that include worker training, engineering controls, and personal protective equipment. Recent studies have shown that such interventions alone are insufficient to adequately manage workplace risks, and that the climate in which the workers and safety program exist (known as the "safety climate") is an equally important consideration. The organizational safety climate is so important that many studies have focused on developing means of measuring it in various work settings. While safety climate studies have been reported for several industrial settings, published studies on assessing safety climate in the university work setting are largely absent. Universities are particularly unique workplaces because of the potential exposure to a diversity of agents representing both acute and chronic risks. Universities are also unique because readily detectable health and safety outcomes are relatively rare. The ability to measure safety climate in a work setting with rarely observed systemic outcome measures could serve as a powerful means of measure for the evaluation of safety risk management programs. ^ The goal of this research study was the development of a survey tool to measure safety climate specifically in the university work setting. The use of a standardized tool also allows for comparisons among universities throughout the United States. A specific study objective was accomplished to quantitatively assess safety climate at five universities across the United States. At five universities, 971 participants completed an online questionnaire to measure the safety climate. The average safety climate score across the five universities was 3.92 on a scale of 1 to 5, with 5 indicating very high perceptions of safety at these universities. The two lowest overall dimensions of university safety climate were "acknowledgement of safety performance" and "department and supervisor's safety commitment". The results underscore how the perception of safety climate is significantly influenced at the local level. A second study objective regarding evaluating the reliability and validity of the safety climate questionnaire was accomplished. A third objective fulfilled was to provide executive summaries resulting from the questionnaire to the participating universities' health & safety professionals and collect feedback on usefulness, relevance and perceived accuracy. Overall, the professionals found the survey and results to be very useful, relevant and accurate. Finally, the safety climate questionnaire will be offered to other universities for benchmarking purposes at the annual meeting of a nationally recognized university health and safety organization. The ultimate goal of the project was accomplished and was the creation of a standardized tool that can be used for measuring safety climate in the university work setting and can facilitate meaningful comparisons amongst institutions.^