community-based participatory research and obesity among pacific islander youth vaka faletau, ms los...
TRANSCRIPT
Community-Based Participatory Research and Obesity among Pacific Islander Youth
Vaka Faletau, MSLos Angeles County, Dept of Children & Family Services
Sora Park Tanjasiri, DrPH, MPHCalifornia State University, Fullerton
Asian Pacific Islander Obesity Prevention AllianceMay 20, 2010
123.5
175.2
75.2
70.6
205.6
187.6
201.8
124.8
0 50 100 150 200 250
Hispanic
Afr American
White
Asian American
Pacific Islander
Guamanian
Hawaiian
Samoan
Rate (per 100,000)
Disparities in Diabetes Mortality in California
Denotes Healthy People 2010 Target (45.0 per 100,000)* Data from the California Department of Health Services, Sentinel Health Indicators for California’s Multicultural Populations, 1991-2001, CA: Center for Health Statistics, May 2004.
2006 NHDR Findings: Considerable Data Gaps Remain for NHPIs
33%
93%
47%
79%
12%
60%
7%
2%
2%
10%
2%
5%
2%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Black Asian NHOPI AI/AN >1 Race Hispanic Poor
No estimate Poor power
Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. 2006 National Healthcare Disparities Report. Rockville, MD: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; December 2006. AHRQ Pub. No. 07-0012.
California is home to over 221,458 Pacific Islanders*
2000 California Population
Alone Inclusive < HS deg< 100%
FPL< 200%
FPLPublic Assist.
Limited English
Native Hawaiian 20,571 60,048 14% 11% 27% 5% 3%
Samoan 37,498 49,804 22% 20% 45% 12% 17%Chamorro/ Guamanian 20,918 33,849 20% 10% 29% 6% 9%
Tongan 12,111 15,252 40% 18% 44% 10% 32%
NH Whites 15,816,790 16,538,491 10% 8% 20% 3% 3%
* U.S. Census, 2000
• NCI Community Network Program (U01CA114591)
• Five year effort to increase cancer education, research and training for Pacific Islanders in Southern California
Population Sizes of Pacific Islanders in Southern California, 2000
WINCART community partners WINCART university partners
50,682
9,567
7,785
25,262
17,113
University ResearchersCommunity Organizations
Ainahau O Kaleponi Hawaiian Civic Club
CA Chamorro Breast Cancer Survivors Alliance
Guam Communications NetworkOrange County Asian and Pacific
Islander Community AlliancePacific Islander Health PartnershipSamoan National Nurses AssocSons and Daughters of Guam ClubTongan Community Service
Center/SSGUnion of Pan Asian Communities
California State University, Fullerton
Claremont Graduate UniversityUniversity of California, Los
AngelesUniversity of California, RiversideUniversity of California, San
DiegoUniversity of Southern California
Community-Based
Participatory Research
CBPR Principles*
• Shared participation
• Cooperative engagement of community and university researchers in processes of co-learning
• Systems and capacity development
• Empowering processes that involve both research and action for community change
* Israel, Parker, Becker (1998)
Physical Activity and Nutrition among Pacific Islander Youth
(PANPY)• 2 year study to assess the feasibility of a
CBPR collaborative to identify obesity risk factors among Marshallese, Samoan and Tongan youth in Southern California
• Funded by the National Institute on Child Health and Human Development (NICHD)
Protocol: DAY 1Informed Consent/Assent
Measure Height & Weight
Complete Food Frequency Questionnaire
Distribute Activity Monitors
DAY 2Collect Activity Monitors
Complete the “Attitudes Toward Physical Activity” questionnaires
Methods: Food Frequency Questionnaire
Provides information on “usual” Provides information on “usual” dietary intakedietary intake
Our version was developed by the Our version was developed by the Cancer Research Center at the Cancer Research Center at the University of Hawai’iUniversity of Hawai’i
160 food items listed160 food items listed
Generally the most useful purpose Generally the most useful purpose is NOT to describe the diet of a is NOT to describe the diet of a group, but rather to compare low to group, but rather to compare low to medium to high intakesmedium to high intakes
Methods: Accelerometers
Sample Graph: Intensity Levels
Methods: Psychosocial Predictors of Physical Activity Questionnaire
“Am I Able?”Physical Self-Worth Scale
(Whitehead, 1995)
Perceived Physical Competence (Harter, 1985)
““Is It Worth It?”Is It Worth It?”Liking of Games and Sports Liking of Games and Sports (Brustad, 1996; Smith, 1999)(Brustad, 1996; Smith, 1999)
Fun of Physical Exertion Fun of Physical Exertion (Brustad, 1996; Smith, 1999)(Brustad, 1996; Smith, 1999)
Liking of Vigorous Exercise Liking of Vigorous Exercise (Brustad, 1996; Smith, 1999)(Brustad, 1996; Smith, 1999)
““Reinforcing Factors”Reinforcing Factors”Peer Acceptance Scale Peer Acceptance Scale (Brustad, 1996)(Brustad, 1996)
Parent Encouragement Parent Encouragement Scale Scale (Brustad, 1996)(Brustad, 1996)
Methods: Psychosocial Predictors of Physical Activity
Results: Participant Profiles
CommunityCommunity Sample Sample SizeSize AgeAge GenderGender
Total SampleTotal Sample 118118x = 15.98x = 15.98
SD = 1.85SD = 1.85
52% 52% malemale
48% 48% femalefemale
TonganTongan 5252x = 15.53x = 15.53
SD = 1.54SD = 1.54
48% 48% malemale
52% 52% femalefemale
MarshalleseMarshallese 2828x = 16.07x = 16.07
SD = 1.86SD = 1.86
54% 54% malemale
46% 46% femalefemale
SamoanSamoan 3838x = 16.26x = 16.26
SD = 2.16SD = 2.16
58% 58% malemale
42% 42% femalefemale
Results: Body Mass Index (BMI)
CommuniCommunityty
MINMIN MAXMAX MeanMean SDSD
Total Total SampleSample 16.5316.53 56.4956.49 30.6430.64 8.758.75
TonganTongan 18.2918.29 55.3055.30 32.8232.82 8.528.52
MarshallesMarshallesee
16.5316.53 42.3842.38 23.8023.80 5.245.24
SamoanSamoan 18.5918.59 56.4956.49 32.0732.07 8.718.71
Results: Average Duration of Physical Activity
Total Males Females
Sedentary (min/day) 508.1 + 120.5 487.8 + 95.2 529.3 + 140.4
Light (min/day) 226.5 + 71.0 283.4 + 68.2 248.2 + 70.4
Moderate (min/day) 35.3 + 24.9 45.4 + 25.9 24.7 + 18.9
Hard (mid/day) 2.1 + 5.3 2.0 + 3.9 2.1 + 6.4
Results: Food Frequency Questionnaire
Results: Psychosocial Predictors of Physical Activity
What We LearnedParticipants should be encouraged to Participants should be encouraged to reduce overall caloric intake and % energy reduce overall caloric intake and % energy from fat and saturated fat from fat and saturated fat
Participants generally over-reported dietary Participants generally over-reported dietary intakes, including large portions (where as intakes, including large portions (where as previous studies have shown under-previous studies have shown under-reporting)reporting)
What We Learned•Feasibility of Assessments With PI Youth
What We Learned•Feasibility of Assessments With PI Youth
Water-proof accelerometers should be designed to assess activities popular with P.I. such as surfing and water polo
A shorter diet questionnaire should be considered to ensure accuracy
A culture-specific questionnaire on physical activity attitudes is also needed
What We Learned•Barriers to Physical Activity Involvement
Limited access to SAFE, open areas
Transportation is a barrier to getting places after school
“We watch TV ‘cause it’s there…”
Include physical activity at cultural or church events (volleyball, football, etc.)
PI youth respect dedicated individuals, regardless of background
Many PI youth are embarrassed by their body size (males)
Acknowledgements• California State University, Fullerton
– Jan Eichenauer– Colleen Kvaska– Archana McEligot– Lianne Nacpil– Sora Park Tanjasiri– Lenny Wiersma
• Pacific Islander Health Partnership– Greta & George Briand– Donny Faaliliu– Vaka Faletau– Joshua Finau– Ka’ala Pang
• Union of Pan Asian Communities– Jonathan “Tana” Lepule
• San Diego State University– Karen Moy
This study was funded by the National Institute on Child
Health and Human Development (grant R21
HD055192)
Thank you!