Bundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz · 2016
[The IDEFICS primary prevention as a good practice example].
Клиническое исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Pigeot Iris, De Henauw Stefaan, Ahrens Wolfgang
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Worldwide the prevalence of childhood overweight and obesity is strikingly high. Prevention programs are therefore of high priority at a national and international level. In the framework of the IDEFICS study a primary prevention program was developed, implemented and evaluated.
OBJECTIVE: This paper investigates to what degree the IDEFICS intervention may serve as good practice example. For this purpose, the single modules are described and the achieved effects are discussed.
METHODS: In eight European countries 16,228 children aged 2 to 9.9 years were recruited from kindergartens and schools. About half of them participated in a primary prevention program. In each country the intervention region was matched to a control region with a similar socio-demographic profile. All children participated in an extensive examination program at baseline, which was repeated two years later to assess the development of the children and the intervention effects. In addition, a further follow-up examination took place five years after the intervention in the framework of the I.Family study.
RESULTS: After two years the IDEFICS intervention showed only minor effects on an individual level, but sustainable effects on the community and the setting level. After five years a beneficial change in the consumption of sugar and water could be observed in the intervention families and children who were overweight and obese at baseline showed favorable weight trajectories.
DISCUSSION: The reasons for the weak intervention effects may be, among others, due to the limited penetration of intervention messages, an insufficient intensity of local intervention activities and our limited ability to induce structural changes of the obesogenic environment.
OBJECTIVE: This paper investigates to what degree the IDEFICS intervention may serve as good practice example. For this purpose, the single modules are described and the achieved effects are discussed.
METHODS: In eight European countries 16,228 children aged 2 to 9.9 years were recruited from kindergartens and schools. About half of them participated in a primary prevention program. In each country the intervention region was matched to a control region with a similar socio-demographic profile. All children participated in an extensive examination program at baseline, which was repeated two years later to assess the development of the children and the intervention effects. In addition, a further follow-up examination took place five years after the intervention in the framework of the I.Family study.
RESULTS: After two years the IDEFICS intervention showed only minor effects on an individual level, but sustainable effects on the community and the setting level. After five years a beneficial change in the consumption of sugar and water could be observed in the intervention families and children who were overweight and obese at baseline showed favorable weight trajectories.
DISCUSSION: The reasons for the weak intervention effects may be, among others, due to the limited penetration of intervention messages, an insufficient intensity of local intervention activities and our limited ability to induce structural changes of the obesogenic environment.