| Literature DB >> 32235659 |
Abirami Srivarathan1,2, Rikke Lund1,2, Ulla Christensen1, Maria Kristiansen2,3.
Abstract
Emerging evidence points towards a lower quality of life, fragile social relations and suboptimal health behavior and status of residents living in social housing areas characterized by ethnic diversity and socioeconomic deprivation. Community-based health promotion interventions developed in collaboration with the target group and adjusted to the local context can affect the acceptance of and engagement in such interventions. However, few studies have investigated the potential of community-based interventions in deprived social housing areas. This study explores residents' perspectives on engagement in a community-based health promotion intervention focusing on enhancing social relations. The study builds on qualitative methods including participant observations combined with pre- and post-intervention interviews with a selected group of residents (n = 9). Data were thematically analyzed with focuses on participation in an everyday life context, concepts of othering, and territorial stigmatization. Engagement in the intervention was motivated by the need to establish and enhance social relations, and to explore the world outside the housing area. However, barriers including cultural and language differences among residents, and competing contextual factors, challenged engagement. We conclude that participatory community-based interventions have a potential to enhance social relations in deprived social housing areas. However, adequate support and efforts to overcome the identified barriers are needed.Entities:
Keywords: community participation; deprived social housing areas; health promotion; interventions
Year: 2020 PMID: 32235659 PMCID: PMC7178143 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph17072341
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Figure 1Co-creation process and intervention components.
Participant characteristics.
| Participant Pseudonym | Age Categories in Years | Sex | Country of Birth | Employment Status | Marital Status | Duration of Residence in the Housing Area in Years |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gizem | 50–59 | Female | Turkey | Unemployed | Married | 30–39 |
| Lone | 60–69 | Female | Denmark | Unemployed | Single | 10–19 |
| Karen | 50–59 | Female | Denmark | Unemployed | Single | 10–19 |
| Vagn | 70–79 | Male | Denmark | Retired | Widowed | 30–39 |
| Dilara | 60–69 | Female | Turkey | Retired | Married | 30–39 |
| Wilma | 60-69 | Female | Denmark | Retired | Single | 10–19 |
| Rose | 80–89 | Female | Denmark | Retired | Single | 20–29 |
| Kaj | 70–79 | Male | Denmark | Employed | Single | <10 |
| Martin | 60–69 | Male | Denmark | Employed | Single | 10–19 |
Themes included in observation and interview guides.
| Themes Explored in Participant Observations | Themes Explored in Pre-Intervention Interviews | Themes Explored in Post-Intervention Interviews |
|---|---|---|
|
Time available for interaction Space/location of the interventions Which groupings, divisions and positions take place? Atmosphere (formal/informal) Interactions between residents/researchers/other people What is articulated before, during and after the interventions and what is left unspoken (everyday life context, need for activities, social relations)? Who brings up topics during the conversations and how are they responded to? Silences and nonverbal reactions |
Age, marital status, significant others/children, level of education, employment Self-reported health Influence of illness on everyday life (physical, psychological, social consequences) Everyday life in the housing area Knowledge, usage and satisfaction of formal and informal health promotion activities Solidarity amongst residents Common identity of residents Perceptions of appreciation and tolerance of diversity in the housing area Immediate reactions of and perspectives on the intervention Pros and cons in relation to engagement Motives for engagement Expected outcomes of engagement |
Memories of the intervention from beginning to end Experiences with verbal and nonverbal interactions Experiences with language and cultural differences among residents Establishment of new relations Experiences with continued interactions after intervention Satisfaction with amount of information received prior to the intervention Optimal/suboptimal conditions Improvements Perceived outcomes of engagement Accordance between expectations and perceived outcomes Engagement in future interventions Engagement in other activities in the housing area Association between motives, perceived outcomes and future engagement |
Figure 2Structure of thematic network.