Prevalencia y factores asociados al embarazo y su reincidencia en adolescentes colombianas

Introducción: El embarazo en adolescentes es uno de los problemas de salud pública más relevantes a nivel mundial. En Colombia, las políticas no han sido efectivas para disminuir la tasa de embarazo en edades tempranas, ni para impedir la reincidencia de la gestación. Este estudio caracteriza esta problemática determinando la prevalencia y los factores asociados tanto del embarazo en adolescentes como de su reincidencia. Métodos: Estudio de corte transversal comparativo a partir de 13,313 adolescentes colombianas respondientes de la Encuesta Nacional de Demografía y Salud, 2010. Se realizaron regresiones multinomiales para comparar el grupo de adolescentes no embarazadas con las que tuvieron uno o varios embarazos y regresión logística para comparar el grupo de embarazo único y el reincidente. Resultados: El 13.3% tuvieron un embarazo y el 3.5% más de uno. Al comparar con las adolescentes que no se embarazaron: a) las adolescentes que tuvieron un embarazo fueron mayores, convivían con su pareja, vivían con más personas, fuera de la familia de origen y habían sido víctimas de abuso sexual y maltrato físico. La probabilidad de embarazo disminuyo en aquellas adolescentes que tenían más recursos económicos, deseaban un menor número de hijos, asistían al colegio, habían usado planificación familiar y recibido educación sexual. b) En las adolescentes que tuvieron más de un embarazo se asociaron los mismos factores sin embargo no hubo diferencias regionales ni asociación con el número deseado de hijos, se encontraron otros factores como el menor nivel educativo y las mujeres de raza negra. La reincidencia también se asocio con la edad mayor del primer compañero sexual, la ausencia de control prenatal y haber tenido un recién nacido prematuro. Conclusiones: Este estudio utilizó una muestra representativa de las adolescentes colombianas. Demuestra tanto las dimensiones del problema como los factores que se encuentran asociados al mismo con lo cual se podrán direccionar programas de prevención adecuadosIntroduction: Teen pregnancy is one of the issues most relevant to public health around the world. In Colombia, the policies have not been effective in reducing the rate of teen pregnancy, or to prevent the recurrence of pregnancy. This study pretends to define the prevalence and factors associated with teen pregnancy and its recurrence. Methods: Cross-sectional study from 13. 313 adolescents who answered the Colombian National Demographic and Health Survey, 2010. Multinomial regressions were performed to compare the group of adolescents who were pregnant with one or more pregnancies and logistic regression to compare the group with one or more pregnancies. Results: 13. 3% had a pregnancy and 3. 5% more than one. When we compared with teens who have never been pregnant: a) the adolescents who had a pregnancy were older, lived with her partner, they were living outside the family home and had been victims of sexual abuse and physical abuse. The likelihood of pregnancy decreased in those adolescents who had more monetary resources, wanted fewer children, attended school, had used family planning and received sexual education b) In the adolescents who had more than one pregnancy were associated the same factors but were not regional differences. Were found other factors such as lower education and black women. Recurrent pregnancy was also associated with older age of first sexual partner, lack of prenatal care and having a premature infant. Conclusions: This study used a representative sample of Colombian adolescents. It shows both the dimensions of the problem and the factors that are associated with it , thus may address appropriate prevention programs

Towards a harmonized European surveillance for dietary and physical activity indicators in young and adult populations

Background The Policy Evaluation Network proposes a consolidated approach to measure comparable health indicators across European health surveillance systems to evaluate effectiveness of policy action. Methods In a stepwise approach, questionnaire items used by the systems for measuring diet and physical activity data to describe health indicators were identified based on their validity, reliability, and suitability to monitor achievement of health recommendations. They were collated to unified questionnaire modules and discussed bilaterally with representatives of these systems to explore barriers and facilitators for implementation. Also, establishment of a methodological competence platform was proposed, in which the surveillance and monitoring systems agree on the priorities and common quality standards for the harmonization process and to coordinate the integration of questionnaire modules into existing systems. Results In total, seven questionnaire modules were developed, of which two diet and two physical activity modules were proposed for implementation. Each module allows measurement of data reflecting only partial aspects of national and WHO recommendations related to diet and physical activity. Main barriers were the requirements of systems to monitor temporal trends and to minimize costs. Main facilitator for implementation was the systems’ use of questionnaire items that were comparable to the unified modules. Representatives agreed to participate in a methodological competence platform. Conclusion We successfully took first steps in the realization of the roadmap towards a harmonization of European surveillance by introducing unified questionnaire modules allowing the collection of comparable health indicators and by initiating the establishment of a competence platform to guide this process

Health surveillance indicators for diet and physical activity: what is available in European data sets for policy evaluation?

BACKGROUND: Policies targeting diet and physical activity have the potential to improve health and well-being at a population level. However, the impact of these policies in Europe is currently unknown. Based on existing data, as well as on a needs assessment, we derived a catalogue of indicators that can be employed to evaluate such policies. These indicators may also inform the further development and harmonization of surveillance systems. METHODS: Forty EU experts agreed on a list of key indicators and ranked their priority for future surveillance. We mapped these indicators onto variables provided by ongoing European surveillance systems. Using a Likert scale (well matched, somewhat matched, poorly matched, unmatched), we assessed the suitability of these variables as measures for the indicators. RESULTS: Key indicators included behaviour outcome indicators relating to diet (n = 72) and physical activity and sedentary behaviour (n = 67) as well as upstream determinants of these behaviours. It was possible to map 72% of diet indicators and 86% of physical activity and sedentary behaviour indicators onto at least one variable in an ongoing surveillance system. CONCLUSIONS: Current monitoring and surveillance systems focus mainly on measuring ‘downstream’ indicators, while gaps exist in policy and environmental level data in dimensions such as inequality, funding and resources and governance

Towards a harmonized European surveillance for dietary and physical activity indicators in young and adult populations

BACKGROUND: The Policy Evaluation Network proposes a consolidated approach to measure comparable health indicators across European health surveillance systems to evaluate effectiveness of policy action. METHODS: In a stepwise approach, questionnaire items used by the systems for measuring diet and physical activity data to describe health indicators were identified based on their validity, reliability, and suitability to monitor achievement of health recommendations. They were collated to unified questionnaire modules and discussed bilaterally with representatives of these systems to explore barriers and facilitators for implementation. Also, establishment of a methodological competence platform was proposed, in which the surveillance and monitoring systems agree on the priorities and common quality standards for the harmonization process and to coordinate the integration of questionnaire modules into existing systems. RESULTS: In total, seven questionnaire modules were developed, of which two diet and two physical activity modules were proposed for implementation. Each module allows measurement of data reflecting only partial aspects of national and WHO recommendations related to diet and physical activity. Main barriers were the requirements of systems to monitor temporal trends and to minimize costs. Main facilitator for implementation was the systems’ use of questionnaire items that were comparable to the unified modules. Representatives agreed to participate in a methodological competence platform. CONCLUSION: We successfully took first steps in the realization of the roadmap towards a harmonization of European surveillance by introducing unified questionnaire modules allowing the collection of comparable health indicators and by initiating the establishment of a competence platform to guide this process

Selection of key indicators for European policy monitoring and surveillance for dietary behaviour, physical activity and sedentary behaviour

Background: A pan-European approach to evaluate policy impact on health behaviour requires the employment of a consensus set of established and relevant indicators. Methods: As part of the Joint Programming Initiative on a Healthy Diet for a Healthy Life, the Policy Evaluation Network PEN identified key indicators of health behaviours and their determinants. These key indicators are already, or have the potential to be, adopted by large European Union surveillance systems for the assessment of policy impact. The iterative selection process included consultations in two rounds via email prior to a 2-days expert workshop. The experts collated a list of dietary behaviour, physical activity and sedentary behaviour indicators for European policy monitoring in young and adult populations based on existing frameworks and literature reviews. The expert panel was composed of researchers, policy makers and representatives of major European surveillance systems and related initiatives, as well as, representatives of organisations providing monitoring data, such as the European Commission and Eurostat. Results: The process provided two lists of key indicators including 37 diet ‘policy’ indicators and 35 indicators for dietary behaviour and their ‘determinants’; as well as 32 physical activity ‘policy’ indicators and 35 indicators for physical activity, sedentary behaviour and their ‘determinants’. Conclusion: A total of 139 key indicators related to the individual, the setting and the population level, and suitable for the assessment of dietary behaviour, physical activity and sedentary behaviour were prioritised by policy makers and researchers with the ultimate aim to embed policy evaluation measures in existing surveillance systems across the European Union. In a next step, data sources and suitable instruments will be identified to assess these key indicators