کد مقاله | کد نشریه | سال انتشار | مقاله انگلیسی | نسخه تمام متن |
---|---|---|---|---|
2657454 | 1564103 | 2009 | 5 صفحه PDF | دانلود رایگان |

Social Marketing Theory is a comprehensive approach of program development encompassing the needs and preferences of the intended audience. It was hypothesized a Social Marketing Theory−based, registered dietitian–led, in-home, cardiovascular disease−targeted diet-education program would improve the dietary status of community-residing older women. Using a randomized control group design, this 90-day program in two North Carolina counties included 58 women (30 control; 28 intervention) ages 54 to 83 years. Data were collected using the Mini Nutritional Assessment, three 3-day food records, and program evaluations. The intervention group received two individual registered dietitian–led in-home education sessions and the control group received education material mailings (Visits 2 and 3). Pretested education materials were used. Visits/mailings were scheduled 28 to 30 days apart. Variables measured included cardiovascular disease−related dietary practices and dietary status (Mini Nutritional Assessment). Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, paired sample t tests, multivariant analyses, and independent t tests. Intervention and control Mini Nutritional Assessment scores improved (P=0.0001). Intervention subjects consumed more fiber than control (P=0.013) and reduced sodium intake (P=0.02). Controls reduced energy (P=0.01) and cholesterol intakes (P=0.029), likely because of the decreased food intake. The majority (n=51, 87.9%) rated the program as good to excellent and almost all (n=55, 94.8%) would recommend the program to a friend. The most popular features of the program were the individualized sessions (n=20, 34.5%) and diet analyses (n=11, 19%). These results suggest that cardiovascular disease diet-education materials utilizing Social Marketing Theory principles can lead to improved dietary status among community-residing older women.
Journal: Journal of the American Dietetic Association - Volume 109, Issue 12, December 2009, Pages 2052–2056