Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Nursing Times Research
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Ashley, A.
Right arrow Articles by Bartlett, H.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Is health-related quality of life a suitable outcome measure for evaluating health promotion programmes?

Andrew Ashley, Mphil

Oxford Centre of Health Care Research & Development, Oxford Brookes University

Andrew Lloyd, Dphil

Oxford Centre of Health Care Research & Development, Oxford Brookes University

Sarah Lamb, Dphil

School of Health and Social Sciences, Coventry University

Helen Bartlett, PhD

Oxford Centre of Health Care Research & Development, Oxford Brookes University

This study describes results from a double blind randomised controlled trial which examined the efficacy of a primary care-based exercise promotion programme (the Health Walks Scheme). Quality of life data from the SF-36 questionnaire are presented from 260 previously sedentary participants randomly selected from a large GP practice (data are available for 72% at the 12-month follow-up). After 12 months, only 61% of participants in the health walks group were still classified as sedentary, compared with 73% in the control group who were simply given advice regarding exercise (p=0.05). There were no significant changes in the dimensions of the SF-36 questionnaire at 12 months. Those people who actually completed a health walk showed larger improvements in dimensions of the SF-36 (although these were also not significant). The appropriateness of quality of life outcome measures in health promotion trials is discussed in the light of the findings.

Key Words: Health-related quality of life • Health promotion • Walking • SF-36 questionnaire • Physical activity

Nursing Times Research, Vol. 6, No. 3, 671-678 (2001)
DOI: 10.1177/136140960100600305
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?