Preventive health concern can explore the connections between the groups and communities through the capacity building and community action. This paper identifies the common needs the concerns of the community in the management health programs. The strategies are described in this essay to engage with a community to implement a program to address the type 2 diabetes. Capacity building model is also analysed in this essay and supports the journey to the empowerment of the community and the ownership of the health prevention program. The pros and cons of the educational approach and the health belief model are also described in this essay to educate and motivate the community about the type 2 disease.
The current and future public health practitioner choses the type 2 diabetes to analyse the community levels of interaction in health programs. In this disease, the cells cannot use glucose for the energy consumption. The pancreas makes the insulin but the cells cannot use this efficiently. As a result, the level of insulin gradually becomes very high. This disease can be affected by being overweight, taking lots of artificial sweeteners and lacking of exercise and activity (Rosenstock & Ferrannini, 2015). Sometimes this health concern can be transferred genetically. The symptoms of this disease include excessive thirst, gaining excessive weight, fatigue, low vision etc. the prevention can be made by taking drugs, constant checking of blood sugar and losing weight through regular physical activities and maintaining diet (Ley, Ardisson Korat, Sun, Tobias & Hu, 2016).
Based on the ladder of community-based interaction, the community is engaged to implement a program of type 2 diabetes (Laverack, 2007). The practitioner needs to listen and communicate with the community and involve them in preventing the type 2 disease.
The community does not have any chance to make any decisions; they just have to follow the instructions based on the chosen health concern. They will communicate directly and involve them in participating in prevention. The health professionals will be taking all the decisions and after words the community is allowed to decide some minor aspects regarding the prevention. Sometimes the community have to just follow the instructions and involve themselves in the campaign. The health professional sometime consult with the community and consider their opinion carefully, then they decide their prevention ideas taking all opinions into account. They also invite the ideas of communities but they take the decision themselves respect to their own terms. The community takes the decisions with the help of the health professionals. Moreover, the community and the health professional decide the prevention program together on the basis of equality.
The community will gain the specialization of the knowledge, social responsibility and service to prevent the health disease. Based on this leader, the community can be engaged to introduce new campaigns to engage them in the prevention program. The health professional engage the community practitioners based on their capacity and influence them to work together on partnership. This will help to understand the pros and cons of the practitioners and it will lead the community to take actions regarding the prevention program (Macridis, Bengoechea, McComber, Jacobs & Macaulay, 2016).
The health professional provide some opportunities to self-organize around the location and as a result, the community practitioners can co-ordinated the efforts and use their ideas to prevent the chosen health concern. The action of the community increases the control over the lives of them. It also implies the ownership that aims at the social and political changes. The community re-negotiate the powers to gain more control in their lives. It also addresses the social, political and economic factors that influence the condition for health and seeks to build the partnership with the other sector to find the solutions. The individuals participate in the discussions and debates to increase the knowledge regarding the type 2 disease and the critical thinking also help them to take their own decisions in the community. The community will gain the support for the development of the skills about the chosen disease and they will get the support regarding building the control their life by preventing the diseases
As stated by Liberato, Brimblecombe, Ritchie, Ferguson & Coveney (2011), the various domains are identified and they are also reassembled into the nine different domains that include the learning opportunities, partnership, resource mobilization, leadership, participation in decision-making, community, communication and sense of approach and asset based approach. Different subdomains of capacity building are also identified that include process monitoring, sustainability, commitment to action, dissemination and community based assessment. These domains are identified through different models. The capacity building is an approach for the health promotion and it is also the development of the skills, resources, commitments and structures. In the capacity-building program, an individual develop the health promotion planning, the manager negotiate the allocation of the resources to support the health prevention program, the project team develops their skills to support and manage the program (Trinh-Shevrin, Nadkarni, Park & Kwon, 2015). The public from different sectors identify their project partners and influence them to health and different sectors. This program has the capacity to deliver the program responses to the specific health problems. This plan also establishes the structures, skills and resources in the health related sector. The capacity building delivers a particular program through the different agencies, which maintains the sustainability in the health sector. It has the capacity to identify the health related issue and this model addresses the issues of type 2 disease and builds the experience on any particular program in its own perception. Before building the capacity within the programs, the health professional needs to identify skills, structures, partnerships and the resources for the health prevention. The effective capacity building is integrated with the existing structures regarding the positions and the accountability allows for the exchange of the experts in the groups of health practitioners (Ika, & Donnelly 2017). However, the top-down approach linked to the government policies.
The capacity building involves the trust and the respect otherwise; the good initiatives can be failed. The lack of trusts among the friends, families and government can create a failure of the commitment and the mutual respect to the genuine needs of all health practitioners. Context refers to the social, physical and the cultural programs within the health program. The contexts can have the positive and negative impact in the ever-changing health prevention program. The public health professional can measure the problems and changes in the health prevention program (Milat, Bauman & Redman, 2015). The capacity builders can be able to observe the issues, interpret their observations, and deliver the appropriate interventions in the perfect time. The relation between the project management group and the capacity builder will help to change the decision-making skills in the health prevention program.
Health belief model:
It helps to understand the failure of people to adopt the prevention strategies of the disease. This model also analyses the symptoms of the patients responses based on the symptoms of this model. The health related behaviours are discussed in this model that include the desire to avoid the disease and the specific health action to prevent the health related disease.
The prevention depends on the perceptions of the patient and the benefits and barriers related to the behaviour of them. The patient’s perception of the risk of the disease varies because of the vulnerability of the disease or illness (Ahadzadeh, Sharif, Ong & Khong, 2015). The person’s feelings about the seriousness on suffering from the illness varies for the severity and often the patient can feel different medical and social consequences at the time of evaluating the severe issues regarding the health concern. It also refers to the effectiveness of the different actions that are available to reduce the threats of the type 2 disease. A patient can take different action based on the illness that depends on the evaluation of the perceived benefit. For example, if the preventive action was perceived as the benefit, the person can accept his health action to prevent the diseases. The person’s feelings based on the hurdles while performing the recommended health prevention action. The person’s feelings of barriers can vary and that lead to the analysis of the benefit. The effectiveness of the action can be dangerous, expensive, and inconvenient or time taking.
The external or internal stimulus are needed to improve the decision making process to accept the health prevention (Zimmerman, DiClemente, Andrus & Hosein, 2016). The stimulus can be the internal including the pains or the external factors including the advice from others and the illness from the family members. Self-efficacy is the level of the confidence of the patient. The person is able to behave successfully. Moreover, it is also the construction of the behavioural theories that relates with the performance of the desired behaviour.
Disadvantages:
It does not depend upon the belief and attitudes of the personal behaviour and it does not dictate the acceptance of the health behaviour. This model does not involve the habitual behaviours and it can inform the process of decision making to do the recommended action. This model does not discuss about the non-health related actions. Furthermore, it does not discuss about the economic and environmental factors that can stop or increase the health action. This model also assumes about that access of equal information on the type 2 disease. It also encourages the people to act towards achieving the common goal in the decision making process.
Advantages:
This model identifies the decision-making criteria to influence the human behaviours. The information are gathered by conducting the health related assignments and they take necessary efforts to understand the risks and it helped to understand the targeted population. This model also identifies the consequences of the chosen health issues with the risk behaviours to understand the severity. Moreover, it provides the assistance in identifying and reducing the barriers and communicates with the Australian population in taking the recommended action in preventing the health disease. This model also demonstrates the action by developing some activities and provides the support to enhance the confidence and the successful behavioural changes.
Health education approach:
The educators can develop these approaches for the health education among the learners. The educators need to be conscious about the disclosure of the personal information to the learners.
Advantages:
The individual should give the consideration before the collection of the sensitive information regarding the chosen health disease (Guetterman, 2015) the educators should inform the learners about the social health education materials and they do not promote their personal recommendation in the approaches (Bowden, 2016). The community could involve all the members to build a good culture where all the learners or patients can get a healthy atmosphere and they can easily choose nutritious foods to prevent the type 2 disease as a part of their health lifestyle. The food courts should maintain the health food service policy to serve the healthy foods and the information must be provided to the community members regarding the usage of artificial sweeteners (Bowen, Cavanaugh, Wolff, Davis & Rothman, 2016).
Disadvantages:
People cannot follow the instructions regarding the health prevention. Many people currently are not accustomed with the broadcasting media; therefore, they will not be aware of the health approach properly. Emails and website promotions can be limited and thus, the community members would not know about their health requirements and standard of lifestyles.
The essay analysed the impact of the cultural, social, environmental and behavioural factors on the health of different populations. The essay also analysed the population health outcomes of the major social, political, economic and cultural forces that can contribute to the health inequalities. The different theories helped to analyse the key-strategies to implement a program to address type 2diabetes. The capacity building plan influences the community empowerment regarding the ownership of the prevention program. The ladder model engaged the community in a program to address the health concern.
