Article Detail

Home > Article Detail
  • P-ISSN 1010-0695
  • E-ISSN 2288-3339

Current Issues in Evaluating Health Promotion Programme Using Traditional Korean Medicine in Korea

Journal of Korean Medicine / Journal of Korean Medicine, (P)1010-0695; (E)2288-3339
2008, v.29 no.5, pp.126-133



  • Downloaded
  • Viewed

Abstract

Purpose:The aim of this study is to identify current situation and issues of outcome measures to evaluate the public health programs using traditional medicine by public health centers in Korea. Method:This study analyse and review existing data and documents related to traditional Korean medicine and health policy using contents analysis method. To collect the information on outcome measures evaluating the programmes, this study reviewed annual reports for health promotion programmes using traditional Korean medicine(HP-TKM) of Hub public health centers, as pilot public health centers, which have implemented the health promotion programmes collectively. Additionally, the review included research articles, government documents and book chapters on the topics related assessments in health promotion. Results:HP-TKM are stroke prevention education, smoke free program, health promotion according to Four Constitutional Medicine, home visiting treatment, etc. However, there are only a few studies of traditional medicine focused health promotion evaluation strategies. The benefits of health promotion programs using TKM can be categorized as non-health benefit, physiological, psychological and physical effects. To manage and monitor the intervention programmes efficiently, attention should be given to developing relevant and valid outcome measures for evaluating the programmes by government and public health center. Conclusion:Up to now, considering number of researchers, research projects undertaken or published articles and reports, within traditional Korean medicine there is a lack of capacity in research. Thus, government should pay more attention to developing relevant and valid outcome measures for evaluating the programs.

keywords
health promotion programmes using traditional Korean medicine, public health center, outcome measures, evaluating health promotion programme, health promotion programmes using traditional Korean medicine, public health center, outcome measures, evaluating health promotion programme


Reference

1

1. Han DW. A study on substantial plan of consumer oriented health promotion programme using traditional Korean medicine, Management Center for Health Promotion. 2007.

2

2. Han DW. Evaluation Tool Development of Community Health Program using Traditional Korean Medicine. Ministry of Health and Welfare. 2005.

3

3. Han DW. Strategies to scale -up the public role of traditional Korean medical services for the future society, Presidential Committee on Ageing and Future Society. 2005.

4

4. Jung EY, Han DW, Choi BH, Kim YG, Park YH. Use of Complementary and Alternative Medicine among Cancer Patients in Korea, Korean J. Oriental Physiology and Pathology 2007; 21(6): 1590-1596.

5

5. Ministry of Health and Welfare. Guideline for 2005 Public Health Program using Traditional Korean Medicine. Ministry of Health and Welfare. 2005.

6

6. Ministry of Health and Welfare. Guideline for 2006 Public Health Program using Traditional Korean Medicine. Ministry of Health and Welfare. 2006.

7

7. Ministry of Health and Welfare. Guideline for 2008 Public Health Program using Traditional Korean Medicine. Ministry of Health and Welfare. 2008.

8

8. Ministry of Health, Welfare and Family Affairs. 2008 Yearbook of Health, Welfare and Family Affairs Statistics. 2008.

9

9. Han DW, Kim H, Yoon T, Woo H. Current Circumstance and issues in traditional Korean health care sector: What are policy options for future society? Korean J. Oriental Preventive Medical Society. 2005;9(1):77-89.

10

10. Ministry of Health and Welfare. White Paper. Ministry of Health and Welfare. 2007.

11

11. Pluyea P, Potvinb L, Denisb J. Making public health programs last: conceptualizing sustainability. Evaluation and Program Planning. 2004;27:121 -133.

12

12. Shadish WR, Cook TD, Leviton LC(eds) Foundations of program evaluation. Theories of practice. Sage, Newbury Park, CA. 1991.

13

13. Lee S, Han DW, Yoon T, Song K, Kim Y. Perception of Health Center Staff on Health Promotion Programme Using Traditional Korean Medicine. J Korean Oriental Med. 2007;28(3): 01-12.

14

14. Cho WY, Yoo WK. An Analysis on Actual Condition of Health Promotion Programme Using Traditional Korean Medicine in Health Center. J Korean Oriental Med. 2006;10(2):81-93.

15

15. World Health Organization. General Guidelines for Methodologies on Research and Evaluation of Traditional Medicine, World Health Organization, Geneva. 2000 (WHO/EDM/TRM/2000.1)

16

16. Julliard KN, Citkovitz C, and McDaniel D. Towards a model for planning clinical research in oriental medicine, Explore, 2007;3:118-128.

17

17. Cribb A, Haycox A. Economic analysis in the evaluation of health promotion. Community Medicine. 1989;11:299 305.

18

18. Borghi J, Jan S. Measuring the benefits of health promotion programmes: Application of the contingent valuation method, Health Policy, 2008; 87(2):235-248.

19

19. Johansson M, Hassmén P, Jouper J. Acute Effects of Qigong Exercise on Mood and Anxiety, International Journal of Stress Management, 2008;15(2):199-207.

20

20. Skoglund L, Jansson E. Qigong reduces stress in computer operators, Complementary Therapies in Clinical Practice, 2007;13(2):78-84.

21

21. Lewith G, Jonas WB, Walach H. (eds.). Clinical Research in complementary therapies principles, problems and solutions, Churchill Livingstone. 2002.

22

22. Han D, Yoon TH. Changes in the traditional Korean medical sector as a result of health related legislation. Med Law, 2006:25(4):685-97.

상단으로 이동

Journal of Korean Medicine