Elliot Diane L, Goldberg Linn, Kuehl Kerry S, Moe Esther L, Breger Rosemary K R, Pickering Michael A
Division of Health Promotion & Sports Medicine, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, Oregon 97239-3098, USA.
J Occup Environ Med. 2007 Feb;49(2):204-13. doi: 10.1097/JOM.0b013e3180329a8d.
PHLAME's (Promoting Healthy Lifestyles: Alternative Models' Effects) objective was to assess and compare two means to promote healthy lifestyles.
Prospective trial among 599 firefighters randomized by station to 1) team-centered curriculum, 2) one-on-one motivational interviewing (MI), and 3) controls. Assessment included dietary behavior, physical activity, weight, and general well-being at baseline and 12 months. Program effects were determined using an analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) based approach, and models for relationships were evaluated with path analysis.
Both interventions were acceptable and delivered with high fidelity. The team and MI programs increased fruit and vegetable consumption (P < 0.01 and 0.05, respectively) and general well-being (P < 0.01). Significantly less weight gain occurred in both (P < 0.05). A cross-sectional model was consistent with mediation differing between interventions.
Both a team-centered and individual-oriented intervention promoted healthy behaviors. The scripted team curriculum is innovative, exportable, and may enlist influences not accessed with individual formats.
PHLAME(促进健康生活方式:替代模式的效果)的目标是评估和比较两种促进健康生活方式的方法。
对599名消防员进行前瞻性试验,按消防站随机分为三组:1)以团队为中心的课程,2)一对一动机性访谈(MI),3)对照组。评估内容包括基线时和12个月时的饮食行为、身体活动、体重和总体幸福感。使用基于协方差分析(ANCOVA)的方法确定项目效果,并通过路径分析评估关系模型。
两种干预措施都可接受且实施具有高保真度。团队课程和MI项目均增加了水果和蔬菜的摄入量(分别为P < 0.01和P < 0.05)以及总体幸福感(P < 0.01)。两者体重增加均显著较少(P < 0.05)。横断面模型与干预措施之间的中介作用差异一致。
以团队为中心和以个人为导向的干预措施均促进了健康行为。编写好的团队课程具有创新性、可推广性,并且可能带来个体形式无法产生的影响。