Evaluating Minimal Intervention Health Promotion in a Clinical Context

Abstract

This article has two objectives. The first objective is to summarize the evaluation of a minimal intervention cardiovascular health promotion program offered to a sample of forty-seven persons having percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty procedures. The second objective is to highlight several issues concerning the utility of small-scale program evaluation in a clinical context, as exemplified by this study. Results of a four month follow-up evaluation of the intervention showed significant findings in the areas of knowledge gain and lifestyle behavior change; these findings are illustrated through binomial effect size displays. The study failed to demonstrate statistically significant results on several measures of physiological and self-reported risk factors. Difficulties in interpreting results due to methodological limitations raise issues concerning the utility of conducting program evaluation efforts with limited resources. Dilemmas often confronted in small-scale evaluation projects and the importance of considering their relative, practical utility are discussed.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Spoth

R. L.

and Dush

D. M.

, A Multicomponent Minimal Intervention Health Program: Preliminary Results, International Quarterly of Community Health Education, 8, pp. 139–155, 1988.

Schettler

Rose

, and Konig

, Secondary Prevention in Myocardial Infarction Survivors, Circulation, 65(1), pp. 216–219, 1982.

Dush

D. M.

and Spoth

R. L.

, Comprehensive Behavioral Medicine in Community Mental Health. A Needs Assessment that Needs Assessment, Evaluation and Program Planning, 11, pp. 297–306, 1988.

Green

L. W.

, Evaluation and Measurement: Some Dilemmas for Health Education, American Journal of Public Health, 67, pp. 155–161, 1977.

Jenkins

C. D.

Rosenman

R. H.

, and Zyzansk

S. J.

, The Jenkins Activity Survey for Health Prediction, C. David Jenkins, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, 1965.

Cook

W. W.

and Medley

D. M.

, Proposed Hostility and Pharisaic-Virtue Scales for the MMPI, Journal of Applied Psychology, 39, pp. 414–418, 1954.

Williams

R. B.

Jr. Barefoot

J. C.

, and Shekelle

R. B.

, The Health Consequences of Hostility, in Anger and Hostility in Cardiovascular and Behavioral Disorders, Chesney

M. A.

and Rosenman

R. H.

(eds.), Hemisphere Publishing Corporation, New York, 1985.

Spielberger

Gorsuch

, and Lushene

, A State-Trait Anxiety Inventory: Test Manual for Form X, Consulting Psychologist's Press, Palo Alto, California, 1968.

Rosenthal

, How Are We Doing in Soft Psychology?, American Psychologist, 45, pp. 775–777, 1990.

10.

Rosnow

and Rosenthal

, Statistical Procedures and the Justification of Knowledge in Psychological Science, American Psychologist, 44, pp. 1276–1284, 1989.

11.

Rosenthal

and Rubin

C. B. B.

, A Simple, General Display of Magnitude of Experimental Effect, Journal of Educational Psychology, 74, pp. 166–169, 1982.

12.

Contrada

R. J.

and Krantz

D. S.

, Stress, Reactivity and Type A Behavior: Current Status and Future Directions, Annals of Behavioral Medicine, 10, pp. 67–70, 1988.

13.

Kaplan

R. M.

, Behavior as the Central Outcome in Health Care, American Psychologist, 45, pp. 1211–1220, 1990.

14.

Burke

J. A.

Becker

S. L.

Arbogast

R. A.

, and Naughton

M. J.

, Problems and Prospects of Applied Research: The Development of an Adolescent Smoking Prevention Program, Journal of Applied Communication Research, 15, pp. 1–18, 1987.

15.

Best

Cameron

, and Grant

, Health Behavior and Health Promotion, American Journal of Health Promotion, 1, pp. 48–57, 1986.

16.

U.S.D.H.H.S., Smoking and Health: A National Status Report, (HHS/PHS/CDC-87-8396), Office on Smoking and Health, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C., 1986.