Is it possible to engage adolescents in community-based non-communicable disease programs?: A case study in a rural area in Yogyakarta

https://doi.org/10.22146/jcoemph.61538

Fitriana Mahardani Kusumaningrum(1*), Cati Martiyana(2), Luqman Afifudin(3), Dita Anugrah Pratiwi(4), Ida Susanti(5), Fahmi Baiquni(6)

(1) Department of Health Behavior, Environment and Social Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Public Health and Nursing, Universitas Gadjah Mada; Center for Health Behavior and Promotion, Faculty of Medicine, Public Health and Nursing, Universitas Gadjah Mada, Yogyakarta, Indonesia
(2) Department of Health Behavior, Environment, and Social Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Public Health and Nursing, Universitas Gadjah Mada, Yogyakarta, Indonesia
(3) Department of Health Behavior, Environment, and Social Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Public Health and Nursing, Universitas Gadjah Mada, Yogyakarta, Indonesia
(4) Department of Health Behavior, Environment, and Social Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Public Health and Nursing, Universitas Gadjah Mada, Yogyakarta, Indonesia
(5) Department of Health Behavior, Environment, and Social Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Public Health and Nursing, Universitas Gadjah Mada, Yogyakarta, Indonesia
(6) Department of Health Behavior, Environment, and Social Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Public Health and Nursing, Universitas Gadjah Mada, Yogyakarta, Indonesia
(*) Corresponding Author

Abstract


Adolescents are a potential segment of society to be involved in health programs. However, adolescent involvement in community-based health programs is limited, especially for non-communicable diseases. This study explores adolescents’ participation in community-based non-communicable disease programs in a rural area of Indonesia, and factors that enable or hinder their engagement. This was a qualitative case study using the data of the Hypertension Responsive Village Movement (HRVM) Program, a community empowerment program for hypertension control in Sleman Regency, Yogyakarta. Participants consisted of adolescents aged 12 to 25 years old who are involved in HRVM. The data analyzed consisted of attendance lists and meeting/activity minutes of 6 adolescents’ programs, transcripts of interviews with 2 community leaders (village head and youth organization leader), resume of a group discussion with adolescents’ representatives, video records of adolescent programs activities and field notes. Thematic data analysis was conducted to describe adolescents’ participation, as well as the barriers and enabling factors. Descriptive analysis of attendance lists and meeting/activity minutes was developed to describe the retention rate of adolescents in the program. Adolescents’ form of participation ranged from being an acceptor to initiator. In the beginning of the program, 20 adolescents participated. However, by the end of the program, only 8 (40%) adolescents remained. Enabling factors for engagement were the community leaders’ supports, the adjustment of program strategies and deliveries with adolescence needs and the availability of social capital in the form of youth organizations. The barriers were adolescents’ limited time and limited adolescents’ participation in youth organization. In conclusion, engaging adolescents in community-based programs is possible even though it provides some challenges because of the limited time adolescents spend in their community. Strengthening stakeholders’ support, adjusting program strategies and deliveries with target characteristics and utilizing social capital are important to engage adolescents in community-based programs.

Keywords


adolescents; community-based program; community empowerment; non-communicable diseases

Full Text:

PDF


References

  1. Badan Pusat Statistik. Proyeksi Penduduk Indonesia 2010–2035/BPS-Statistics Indonesia, 2010 Population Census and Indonesia Population Projection 2010–2035. Jakarta. 2013
  2. Lule E, Rosen JE, Singh S, et al. Adolescent Health Programs. In: Jamison DT, Breman JG, Measham AR, et al., editors. Disease Control Priorities in Developing Countries. 2nd edition. Washington (DC): The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development / The World Bank; 2006. Chapter 59. Co-published by Oxford University Press, New York.
  3. Ewald DR, Haldeman LA. Risk factors in adolescent hypertension. Global Pediatric Health. 2016;3: 2333794X15625159.
  4. Salam RA, Das JK, Lassi ZS, Bhutta ZA. Adolescent health interventions: conclusions, evidence gaps, and research priorities. J Adolesc Health. 2016; 59(4 Suppl):S88–S92.
  5. Merves ML, Rodgers CRR, Silver EJ, Sclafane JH, Bauman LJ. Engaging and sustaining adolescents in community-based participatory research: structuring a youth-friendly CBPR environment. Fam Community Health. 2015;38(1):22–32.
  6. Rose-Clarke K, Bentley A, Marston C, Prost A. Peer-facilitated community-based interventions for adolescent health in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic review. PLoS One. 2019 January; 23.
  7. Riskiyani S, Sabarinah. Determinants of student participation in drug prevention programs in Jakarta and Makassar. KnE Life Sciences. 2018.4(1):264 – 271.
  8. Violita F, Hadi EN. Determinants of adolescent reproductive health service utilization by senior high school students in Makassar, Indonesia. BMC Public Health. 2019; 19(286).
  9. Agdal R, Midtgard IH, Meidell V. Can asset-based community development with children and youth enhance the level of participation in health promotion projects?: a qualitative meta-synthesis. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2019 Oct; 16(19): 3778.
  10. Arnstein SR. A ladder of citizen participation. J Am Plann Assoc. 2019;85(1):24–34.
  11. Martiyana C, Pratiwi DA, Susanti I, Afifuddin L. Laporan Implentasi dan Evaluasi Pelaksanaan Kegiatan Gerakan Dukuh Tanggap Hipertensi (GDTH) Dukuh Pundong II, Desa Tirtoadi, Kecamatan Mlati, Kabupaten Sleman. 2017. Yogyakarta: Library of Post Graduate School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine, Public Health and Nursing, Universitas Gadjah Mada
  12. Ruggiano N, Perry TE. Conducting secondary analysis of qualitative data: Should we, can we and how? Qualitative Social Work. 2017 April; 18(1).
  13. Creswell JW, Poth CN. Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing Among Five Approaches. 2017. USA: SAGE Publications, Inc.
  14. Frank KI. The potential of youth participation in planning. J Plan Lit. May 2006; 20(4).
  15. Cahill H & Dadvand B. Re-conceptualising youth participation: a framework to inform action. Child Youth Serv Rev. 2018; 95: 243-253.
  16. Ahmed SM, Palermo AS. Community engagement in research: frameworks for education and peer review. Am J Public Health. August 2010; 100(8).
  17. Cyrill S, Smith BJ, Possamai-Inesedy A, Rensaho AMN. Exploring the role of community engagement in improving the health of disadvantaged populations: a systematic review. Glob Health Action. 2015; 8.
  18. De Weger E, Van Vooren N, Luijkx KG, Baan CA, Drewes HW. Achieving successful community engagement: A rapid realist review. BMC Health Serv Res. 2018;18(1):1–18.
  19. Larsson I, Staland-Nyman C, Svedberg P, Nygren JM, Carlson I. Children and young people’s participation in developing interventions in health and well-being: a scoping review. BMC Health Serv Res. 2018; 18:507.
  20. Hart RA. Stepping Back from ‘The Ladder’: Reflections on a Model of Participatory Work with Children in Reid A, Jensen B, Nikel J, Simovska V. (eds) Participation and Learning: Developing Perspectives on Education and the Environment, Health and Sustainability. (pp.19 – 31). Chapter 2. UK: Springer.
  21. Wilkins CH. Effective engagement requires trust and being trustworthy. Med Care. Oct 2018; 56 (10 Suppl 1): S6 – S8.
  22. Christopher S, Watts V., McCormick A., Young S. Building and maintaining trust in a community-based participatory research partnership. American Journal of Public Health. August 2008; 98(8): 1398 - 1406
  23. Smith KL, Straker LM, McManus A, Fenner AA. Barriers and enablers for participation in healthy lifestyle programs by adolescents who are overweight: a qualitative study of the opinions of adolescents, their parents and community stakeholders. BMC Pediatr. 2014; 14(53).
  24. Glanz K, Rimer BK, Viswanath K. Health Behavior and Health Education. 2008. San Francisco: John Wiley & Sons.
  25. UNICEF. Adolescent and Youth Engagement Strategic Framework. 2017. New York: UNICEF
  26. Shackleton N, Jamal F, Viner RM, Dickson K, Patton G, Bonell C. School-based interventions going beyond health education to promote adolescent health: systematic review of reviews. J Adolesc Health. Apr 2016; 58(4): 382 – 396.
  27. Morgan K, Godwin JV, Darwent K, Fildes A. Formative research to develop a school-based, community-linked physical activity role model programme for girls: Choosing Active Role Models to Inspire Girls (CHARMING). BMC Public Health. 2019; 19(437).



DOI: https://doi.org/10.22146/jcoemph.61538

Article Metrics

Abstract views : 2196 | views : 1273

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright (c) 2021 Journal of Community Empowerment for Health

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.