Search

Background: Health promotion and disease prevention programme registries (HPPRs), also called 'best practice portals', serve as entry points and practical repositories that provide decision-makers with easy access to (evidence-based) practices. However, there is limited knowledge of differences or overlaps of howe current national HPPRs in Europe function, the context and circumstances in which these HPPRs were developed, and the mechanisms utilised by each HPPR for the assessment, classification and quality improvement of the included practices. This study prepared an overview of different approaches in several national HPPRs and the EU Best Practice Portal (EU BPP) as well as identified commonalities and differences among the core characteristics of the HPPRs., Methods: We conducted a descriptive comparison - that focused on six European countries with existing or recently developed/implemented national HPPR and the EU BPP -to create a comparative overview. We used coding mechanisms to identify commonalities and differences; we performed data management, collection and building consensus during EuroHealthNet Thematic Working Group meetings., Results: All HPPRs offer a broad range of health promotion and disease-prevention practices and serve to support practitioners, policymakers and researchers in selecting practices. Almost all HPPRs have an assessment process in place or planned, requiring the application of assessment criteria that differ among the HPPRs. While all HPPRs collect and share recommendable practices, others have implemented further measures to improve the quality of the submitted practices. Different dissemination tools and strategies are employed to promote the use of the HPPRs, including social media, newsletters and publications as well as capacity building workshops for practice owners or technical options to connect citizens/patients with local practices., Conclusions: Collaboration between HPPRs (at national and EU level) is appreciated, especially regarding the use consistent terminology to avoid misinterpretation, facilitate cross-country comparison and enable discussions on the adaption of assessment criteria by national HPPRs. Greater efforts are needed to promote the actual implementation and transfer of practices at the national level to address public health challenges with proven and effective practices., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

The burden of chronic disease in Europe continues to grow. A major challenge facing national governments is how to tackle the risk factors of sedentary lifestyle, alcohol abuse, smoking, and unhealthy diet. These factors are complex and necessitate intersectoral collaboration to strengthen health promotion, counter-act the social determinants of health, and reduce the prevalence of chronic disease. European countries have diverse intersectoral collaboration to encourage health promotion activities. In the Joint Action CHRODIS-PLUS success factors for intersectoral collaboration within and outside healthcare which strengthen health promotion activities were identified with a mixed method design via a survey of 22 project partners in 14 countries and 2 workshops. In six semi-structured interviews, the mechanisms underlying these success factors were examined. These mechanisms can be very context-specific but do give more insight into how they can be replicated. In this paper, 20 health promotion interventions from national programs in CHRODIS PLUS are explored. This includes community interventions, policy actions, integrated approaches, capacity building, and training activities. The interventions involved collaboration across three to more than six sectors. The conclusion is a set of seven recommendations that are considered to be essential for fostering intersectoral collaboration to improve health-promoting activities.

Registration or recognition systems for best-practice health promotion interventions may contribute to better quality assurance and control in health promotion practice. In the Netherlands, such a system has been developed and is being implemented aiming to provide policy makers and professionals with more information on the quality and effectiveness of available health promotion interventions and to promote use of good-practice and evidence-based interventions by health promotion organizations. The quality assessments are supervised by the Netherlands Organization for Public Health and the Environment and the Netherlands Youth Institute and conducted by two committees, one for interventions aimed at youth and one for adults. These committees consist of experts in the fields of research, policy and practice. Four levels of recognition are distinguished inspired by the UK Medical Research Council's evaluation framework for complex interventions to improve health: (i) theoretically sound, (ii) probable effectiveness, (iii) established effectiveness, and (iv) established cost effectiveness. Specific criteria have been set for each level of recognition, except for Level 4 which will be included from 2011. This point of view article describes and discusses the rationale, organization and criteria of this Dutch recognition system and the first experiences with the system.

In the present study 44 participants (32 females and 12 males) of the studies on the effects of a diet (D) diet-exercise (DE) treatment on body composition and sleeping metabolic rate (SMR), were followed over a period of 18, 36 or 42 months post-treatment. Mean weight loss after treatment (12-14 weeks) was 12.0 and 16.5 kg for D and DE respectively (P less than 0.05; D. v. DE) and fat loss (9.5 kg and 13.5 kg for D and DE respectively, D v. DE P less than 0.05). Nine subjects dropped out during the follow-up phase. After 18, 36 or 42 months follow-up the diet group regained 90% of their initial weight loss compared to 60% of the diet-exercise group (P less than 0.05). Seven subjects out of the original diet-exercise group kept up their exercise activities, while two subjects from the diet group started exercising. These subjects (EX) gained only 23 per cent of their weight loss, but their body weight at the start of the study tended to be lower compared to the diet and the diet-exercise group (86.5 (EX) v. 91.4 and 95.2 for D and DE respectively). During the last follow-up measurement SMR of 18 subjects was determined and revealed a persistent lower SMR for nine non-exercising subjects (18.6 per cent lower than before treatment), whereas for subjects who kept on exercising, SMR was 9.8 per cent lower than baseline values. Per kg FFM SMR was almost restored to baseline values for the EX group, whereas the non-exercising subjects still showed depressed values (EX 3.7 per cent and D + DE 15.8 per cent lower than before treatment; P less than 0.05). It was concluded that exercise is one of the factors which contributes to the restoration of SMR and long term weight maintenance.

The micronutrient status of 12 obese male subjects was evaluated before and after a 14-week period of a low energy diet (3.0-3.9 MJ) with or without an exercise (5 h p/w) treatment. The subjects were matched on the basis of their body mass index (BMI kg/m2) into a diet group (D; average BMI 32.2) and a diet-exercise group (DE; average BMI 32.9). After 14 weeks both groups showed similar results in term of weight loss (D 15.1; DE 16.4 kg), fat loss (D 11.7; DE 13.6 kg) and loss of fat free mass (FFM) (D 3.4; DE 2.8 kg). With respect to changes of the micronutrients in blood plasma only the decrease in ferritin was significantly different between D and DE (P less than 0.05), with a larger decrease for DE. In both groups significant decreases of about 20% in fat soluble vitamins were observed. Water soluble vitamins demonstrated a large variation between individuals and decreases were not significant.

The effects of dieting and exercise on RMR, body composition and maximal aerobic power were studied in 12 obese women. The subjects were paired on the basis of their body mass index and divided into a diet (D) and a diet + exercise group (DE). The treatment consisted of a 5-week period with a low-energy formula diet of 2.9 MJ and an 8-week period with a mixed diet of 1.7 MJ supplemented with 1.8 MJ normal foodstuffs. DE trained 4 h per week at 50-60 per cent of their maximal aerobic power with aerobics and fitness exercises. Body composition was determined by hydrostatic weighing and RMR was measured from 03.00 to 06.00 hours in a respiration chamber. Maximal aerobic power was measured on a continuously braked ergometer. The measurements were done at week 0, after 4 weeks (week 5), and after 12 weeks (week 13). Weight loss after 4 weeks was 8.2 kg (DE) and 7.9 kg (D) and after 12 weeks 13.2 kg (DE) and 12.2 kg (D). There were no significant differences between the groups. Fat loss was also not statistically different between DE (6.7 and 10.9 kg) and D (6.0 and 9.4 kg). Both groups showed a significant decrease in RMR per kilogram FFM after 12 weeks (DE: 18.2 per cent and D: 26.5 per cent). There was also a significant decrease in RMR for D (19.9 per cent) after 4 weeks but not for DE (12.2 per cent).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Body composition, sleeping metabolic rate (SMR), 24-h energy expenditure (24-EE) and daily physical activity were determined in 12 obese women during and after 12 weeks of exercise (4 h per week on 55 per cent of VO2 max) and/or energy restriction (2.9-3.5 MJ/d). Diet(D) and diet-exercise (DE) groups were formed by matching the subjects on their body mass index (BMI, kg/m2; mean 30.3). After 12 weeks no significant differences were shown in loss of weight (D 12.2 and DE 13.2 kg) and loss of fat mass (D 9.4 and DE 10.9 kg). Both groups reduced their SMR (D 29.9 per cent and DE 21.7 per cent) and their metabolic rate during the entire night measured by indirect calorimetry (12-EE) (D 36.4 per cent and DE 28.6 per cent; P less than 0.05). Energy expenditure over 24 h, estimated by means of heart-rate monitoring, was reduced by 22.1 per cent for D and by 19.6 per cent for DE (n.s.). Daily physical activity, which was determined during 5 d using an actometer, was increased after 12 weeks for DE (27 per cent; P less than 0.05) and D (10 per cent; n.s.). The suggestion that a reduction in normal activities of daily life in a diet-exercise group is the explanation for the absence of significant differences in weight and fat loss between a diet-exercise and a diet group is not confirmed in this study. Daily physical activity showed a significantly higher increase for the diet-exercise group than for the diet group, while the decline of SMR and 24-EE tended to be smaller.