Palank C L
Shenandoah Community Health Center, Martinsburg, West Virginia.
Nurs Clin North Am. 1991 Dec;26(4):815-32.
The determinants of health promotive-behavior are proposed by Pender in the HPM. The exact impact of the various variables on singular behaviors or a lifestyle index, however, is far from conclusive. All the proposed factors have been supported through research, at least in part, as either directly or indirectly influencing the intent to participate in different health behaviors. The difficulty in concluding which variables are most critical is perhaps due to the variety of definitions, theoretical approaches (from different disciplines), and research methods. Of primary concern to this author is the overlap of activities among different "patterns" of behavior and the various definitions of such behavioral patterns. Little evidence exists on how specific types of behaviors relate to one another. Thus, knowing the determinants of a lifestyle index, for example, may be insignificant if the goal of nursing is to target priority behaviors that may indeed be influenced by more significant variables. For example, a person's perception of control may be a significant predictor of lifestyle behaviors in general; however, this variable may not impact on the person's decision to engage in changes related to exercise or activity behavior. Hence, because the motives behind various behaviors may be different, it seems more prudent to invest our research efforts on the impact of various factors on singular behaviors rather than lifestyle patterns. Finally, the efforts of nursing research on health behavior have been directed primarily at explaining the impact of various individual perceptions on the likelihood of behavior. Such focus has revealed some evidence of the significance of these variables, yet much unexplained variance remains. Perhaps it would be more prudent to direct attention at those variables such as situational or environmental factors that may impede or act as a cue to healthy behavior. Because the explanation of behavior has been individually focused (perhaps due to an "individualizing" theme in nursing education), the impact of the ecological model of behavior tends to be dismissed or underrated in nursing research. Knowledge of the impact of societal factors on behavior may be more appropriate to planning strategies for various groups rather than the behavioristic approaches that separate people from their social, physical, and economic environments. Thus, personal lifestyles may not be a simple matter of informed choice, and attention to the complex processes of societal opportunities, cultural interpretations, and group-specific attitudes must be studied further.
彭德在健康促进模式(HPM)中提出了健康促进行为的决定因素。然而,各种变量对单一行为或生活方式指数的确切影响远未定论。所有提出的因素都至少在一定程度上通过研究得到了支持,因为它们直接或间接地影响参与不同健康行为的意图。难以确定哪些变量最为关键,可能是由于定义、理论方法(来自不同学科)和研究方法的多样性。作者主要关注的是不同行为“模式”之间活动的重叠以及此类行为模式的各种定义。关于特定类型的行为如何相互关联,几乎没有证据。因此,如果护理的目标是针对可能确实受到更重要变量影响的优先行为,那么了解生活方式指数的决定因素可能并不重要。例如,一个人对控制的认知可能总体上是生活方式行为的一个重要预测因素;然而,这个变量可能不会影响这个人做出与锻炼或活动行为相关改变的决定。因此,由于各种行为背后的动机可能不同,将研究精力投入到各种因素对单一行为而非生活方式模式的影响上似乎更为谨慎。最后,护理研究在健康行为方面的努力主要集中在解释各种个人认知对行为可能性的影响。这种关注揭示了这些变量重要性的一些证据,但仍有许多无法解释的差异。也许将注意力转向那些可能阻碍或作为健康行为提示的情境或环境因素等变量会更为谨慎。由于对行为的解释一直以个体为重点(可能是由于护理教育中的“个体化”主题),行为生态模型的影响在护理研究中往往被忽视或低估。了解社会因素对行为的影响可能更适合为不同群体制定策略,而不是将人与他们的社会、物理和经济环境分开的行为主义方法。因此,个人生活方式可能不是一个简单的明智选择问题,必须进一步研究对社会机会、文化解读和特定群体态度等复杂过程的关注。