domingo, 7 de junio de 2015

Factors Involved in the Collaboration Between the National Comprehensive Cancer Control Programs and Tobacco Control Programs: A Qualitative Study of 6 States, United States, 2012

full-text ►

Factors Involved in the Collaboration Between the National Comprehensive Cancer Control Programs and Tobacco Control Programs: A Qualitative Study of 6 States, United States, 2012



CDC. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. CDC 24/7: Saving Lives. Protecting People.



Preventing Chronic Disease Logo



Factors Involved in the Collaboration Between the National Comprehensive Cancer Control Programs and Tobacco Control Programs: A Qualitative Study of 6 States, United States, 2012





Behnoosh Momin, MS, MPH; Antonio Neri, MD, MPH; Sonya A. Goode, MPH; Nikie Sarris Esquivel, MPH; Carol L. Schmitt, PhD; Jennifer Kahende, PhD; Lei Zhang, PhD; Sherri L. Stewart, PhD

Suggested citation for this article: Momin B, Neri A, Goode SA, Sarris Esquivel N, Schmitt CL, Kahende J, et al. Factors Involved in the Collaboration Between the National Comprehensive Cancer Control Programs and Tobacco Control Programs: A Qualitative Study of 6 States, United States, 2012. Prev Chronic Dis 2015;12:150012. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5888/pcd12.150012.
PEER REVIEWED

Abstract

Introduction
Historically, federal funding streams to address cancer and tobacco use have been provided separately to state health departments. This study aims to document the impact of a recent focus on coordinating chronic disease efforts through collaboration between the 2 programs.
Methods
Through a case-study approach using semistructured interviews, we collected information on the organizational context, infrastructure, and interaction between cancer and tobacco control programs in 6 states from March through July 2012. Data were analyzed with NVivo software, using a grounded-theory approach.
Results
We found between-program activities in the state health department and coordinated implementation of interventions in the community. Factors identified as facilitating integrated interventions in the community included collaboration between programs in the strategic planning process, incorporation of one another’s priorities into state strategic plans, co-location, and leadership support for collaboration. Coalitions were used to deliver integrated interventions to the community. Five states perceived high staff turnover as a barrier to collaboration, and all 5 states felt that federal funding requirements were a barrier.
Conclusions
Cancer and tobacco programs are beginning to implement integrated interventions to address chronic disease. Findings can inform the development of future efforts to integrate program activities across chronic disease prevention efforts.

Acknowledgments

This project was administered by CDC through funds from the US Government’s 2009 American Recovery and Reinvestment Act through the Office of the Secretary Award no. 200-2008-27958, Task Order 0014.
 Top

Author Information

Corresponding Author: Behnoosh Momin, MS, MPH, Division of Cancer Prevention and Control, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 4770 Buford Highway, MS F-76, Atlanta, GA 30341. Telephone: 770-488-3112. Email: fqv6@cdc.gov.
Author Affiliations: Antonio Neri, Sherri L. Stewart, Division of Cancer Prevention and Control, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia; Sonya A. Goode, Nikie Sarris Esquivel, Carol L. Schmitt, RTI International, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina; Jennifer Kahende, Lei Zhang, Office on Smoking and Health, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia.
 Top

References

  1. Lasker RD, Weiss ES. Broadening participation in community problem solving: a multidisciplinary model to support collaborative practice and research. J Urban Health 2003;80(1):14–47, discussion 48–60. CrossRef PubMed
  2. The health consequences of smoking — 50 years of progress: a report of the Surgeon General. Atlanta (GA): US Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Office on Smoking and Health; 2014.
  3. Doroshow JH, Croyle RT, Niederhuber JE. Five strategies for accelerating the war on cancer in an era of budget deficits. Oncologist 2009;14(2):110–6. CrossRef PubMed
  4. US Department for Health and Human Services. Collaborative chronic disease, health promotion, and surveillance program announcement: Healthy Communities, Tobacco Control, Diabetes Prevention and Control, and Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System. http://www.cdc.gov/od/pgo/funding/DP09-901.htm. Accessed May 7, 2013.
  5. C-Change. Collaborating to conquer cancer. http://c-changetogether.org/. Accessed April 10, 2013.
  6. Salinsky E, Gursky EA. The case for transforming governmental public health. Health Aff (Millwood) 2006;25(4):1017–28. CrossRef PubMed
  7. Butterfoss F, Kegler M. Toward a comprehensive understanding of community coalitions: moving from practice to theory. In: Emerging theories in health promotion practice and research. DiClemente R, Crosby R, Kegler M, editors. San Francisco (CA): Jossey-Bass; 2002. p. 157–93.
  8. NVivo qualitative data analysis software; QSR International Pty Ltd. Version 10, 2012.
  9. Glaser BG, Strauss AL. The discovery of grounded theory: strategies for qualitative research. Chicago (IL): Aldine de Gruyter; 1967.
  10. Prevention and Public Health Fund Coordinated Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion Program. Atlanta (GA): US Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion; 2011. http://www.cdc.gov/chronicdisease/about/prev-pubhealth-fund.htm. Accessed November 20, 2014.
  11. Lavinghouze R, Snyder K, Rieker P, Ottoson J. Consideration of an applied model of public health program infrastructure. J Public Health Manag Pract 2013;19(6):E28–37. CrossRefPubMed
  12. Glebbeek AC, Bax EH. Is high employee turnover really harmful? An empirical test using company records. Acad Manage J 2004;47(2):277–86. CrossRef
  13. Morrison R. Informal relationships in the workplace: associations with job satisfaction, organizational commitment and turnover intentions. N Z J Psychol 2004;33(3):114–28.
  14. Sias PM, Cahill DJ. From coworkers to friends: the development of peer friendships in the workplace. West J Commun 1998;62(3):273–99. CrossRef
  15. Chronic Disease Prevention Alliance of Canada. The case for change. Ottawa (CA): Chronic Disease Prevention Alliance of Canada; 2004. http://www.cdpac.ca/content/case_for_change/ case_for_change.asp. Accessed December 2012.
  16. Shiell A. Are integrated approaches working to promote healthy weights and prevent obesity and chronic disease? Calgary (CA): University of Calgary; 2004. http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/sr-sr/finance/hprp-prpms/final/2004-obesit-integre_e.html. Accessed December 2012.
  17. World Health Organization. Countrywide integrated noncommunicable diseases intervention (CINDI) programme. Geneva (CH): World Health Organization. http://www.euro.who.int/CINDI. Accessed December 10, 2012.

No hay comentarios: