In article 1, health promotion was defined with regards to interpreting health communication through ‘ICT literacy for meeting primary health promotion needs’ (Mahmud, Olander, Eriksén, & Haglund, 2013, abstract). The second article projected a secondary health promotion concept whereby researchers evaluated the efficacy of web-based ‘Center for Disease Control intervention for reducing obesity in communities through internet education’ (Roemer, Liss-Levinson, Samoly, Guy, Tabrizi, Beckowski, Xiaofei & Goetzel, abstract). Thirdly, ‘Health Promotion in Nursing and Cost-Effectiveness’ (Jadelhack, 2012, abstract ) describes the concept from a tertiary level perspective urging nursing/ nursing care institution to reevaluate health promotion education at that level in promoting cost effective interventions (Jadelhack, 2012) .These three concept articulates health promotion into focusing on primary, secondary and tertiary interventions.
According to Jadelhack (2012) the purpose of health promotion in nursing practice is related to educating for speedy recovery moving out of a pattern of lengthy stays in health care institutions and returning quickly into the communities. Speaking with regards to primary health care institutions such as hospitals the purpose is to teach so that patients will not frequent the institution for the same conditions or complications of it, from time after time (Jadelhack, 2012).. With reference to Mahmud and colleagues’ (2013) assumptions the purpose of health promotion in nursing is to communicate health values to the community through effective communication systems and devices applicable to the intervention (Mahmud et.al, 2013). At the secondary level health promotion according to Roemer (2013) and counterparts is making available data resources in detection and management of prevalent disease to the general public through devices that are available accessible, nationally as well as internationally. In their interpretation it was the World Wide Web (Roemer et.al, 23). When these variables are measured in terms of primary, secondary and tertiary levels of health promotion Jadelhack ( 2012) offers a tertiary purpose perception whereas Mahmud ( 2013) and colleagues intervenes with a primary point of view and Roemer ‘s ( 2013) team focuses of secondary aspects that relates to the purpose.
Therefore, as nursing roles and responsibilities are evolving in health promotion practices these articles continues to focus on health promotion is moving into evidence based interventions and away from tradition forms of execution. No longer is it simply documenting disease incidences, but continuous research in developing evidence in planning strategies for new developments within the science. For example in the article, ‘A Descriptive Evaluation of CDC’s LEAN Works! Leading Employees to Activity and Nutrition—A Web-Based Employer Tool for Workplace Obesity Management’ highlights changing nursing roles and responsibilities of health promotion in nursing. It is now requiring knowledge major research techniques; translation of evidence into practice and monitoring of health information systems (Roemer et.al, 2013).More important, this has been projected in Mahmud’s (2013) article as well when research is being conducted at a primary health promotion level to investigate nurses’ adaptability of modern informatics to communication in primary health care (PHC) interventions. The researchers acknowledged that communication in primary healthcare (PHC) literacy would be greatly improved if nurses’ had basic computer skills training and knew how to manage health information systems efficiently (Mahmud et.al, 2013).
As such, based on Jadelhack‘s ( 2012) analysis of cost effectiveness in relation to tertiary level health promotion practices he advocated that choosing information systems that are cost effective is essential to managing work load; tracking incidences and easily detecting trends. These are some new roles and responsibilities nurses at the tertiary health promotion level have to adapt. Further, the researcher reiterated that healthcare systems, internationally, ought to consider changing nurses roles and responsibilities of nursing in adapting to modern techniques within the science (Jadelhack, 2012).This integrated approach towards translating evidence into practice according to these research articles help communities appreciate the purpose of health promotion projects; roles nurse play in executing them how they can collaborate for successful outcomes.
The implementation methods for health promotion that encompasses all areas of nursing are administration of primary healthcare intervention in the form education programs; dissemination of relevant literature to the public pertaining to disease prevention strategies; screening and administering vaccination programs. At the secondary level it is engaging in disaster relief programs when disasters occur and training in self-management of long term illness such as diabetes mellitus; hypertension or kidney diseases. At the tertiary level is teaching for rehabilitation of the patient/ client for restoration of health or learning to live with a disability.
In the three articles reviewed they can be identified, Article 1, as nurses’ adaptability effective communication through modern information technology at the PHC level. Article 2 embraces the nurses’ responsibility of the monitoring information dissemination in disease conditions at the secondary level and in article 3, nurses’ role of reducing health care costs through early rehabilitation strategies (Mahmud et. al, 2013)( Roemer et.al, 2013)( Jadelhack, 2012). When comparing the three levels of health promotion prevention it must be understood that they are related to the three levels of health care offered in United States of America. According to the articles presented they are primary, secondary and tertiary. During primary intervention it is communicating though effective healthcare literacy devices; secondary is implementing measures to manage disease conditions as the web based education. The tertiary was portrayed by developing cost effectiveness in health care institutions for effective rehabilitation and reducing readmission incidences (Mahmud et. al, 2013) (Roemer et.al, 2013)( Jadelhack, 2012).
Mahmud, A. Olander, E. Eriksén, S., & Haglund, B. (2013) Health communication in primary health care – A case study of ICT development for health promotion. BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making 13(1), 1-15. Retrieved on April 1st, 2013 f http://ehis.ebscohost.com.library.gcu.edu:2048/eds/detail?vid=12&sid=17f4cb38-536a-4515-a73ade10a54e4da0%40sessionmgr14&hid=102&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWRzLWxpdmUmc2NvcGU9c2l0ZQ%3d%3d
Roemer, E. Liss-Levinson, R; Samoly, D. Guy, P. Tabrizi, J. Beckowski, M. Xiaofei, P., & Goetzel, R. (2013). A Descriptive Evaluation of CDC’s LEAN Works! Leading Employees to Activity and Nutrition—A Web-Based Employer Tool for Workplace Obesity Management. American Journal of Health Promotion. 27 ( 4), 245- 7. Retrieved on April 1st 2013 from http://ehis.ebscohost.com.library.gcu.edu:2048/eds/detail?vid=8&sid=17f4cb38-536a4515a73ade10a54e4da0%40sessionmgr14&hid=102&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWRzLWxpdmUmc2NvcGU9c2l0ZQ%3d%3d#db=s3h&AN=85927779
Jadelhack, R. (2012). Health Promotion in Nursing and Cost-Effectiveness. Journal of Cultural Diversity 19 (2), 65-8. Retrieved on April 1st, 2013 from http://ehis.ebscohost.com.library.gcu.edu:2048/eds/detail?vid=10&sid=17f4cb38-536a-4515-a73ade10a54e4da0%40sessionmgr14&hid=102&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWRzLWxpdmUmc2NvcGU9c2l0ZQ%3d%3d