No abstract

This article describes a qualitative evaluation of the Seniors Active Living in Vulnerable Elders (ALIVE) program, a 10-month health promotion program for low income seniors. Program interventions delivered in seniors' apartment buildings included exercise classes, health information sessions (i.e., health corners), and newsletters. The evaluation examined program participation, program impacts, and how the program worked. The most frequent reason for joining the program was recognizing the benefits of exercise, and the most frequent reason for not attending the program was having other priorities. The main participant impact was "feeling better." Specific impacts were also noted in physical, mental, and social domains. Fun, program delivery adaptations, autonomy, social interactions, and staff-participant relationships were discovered to be important program processes. These processes all contributed to participant's "comfort" in the program. How and why the program worked is examined in relation to Pender's (1996) revised health promotion model and implications for nursing are indicated.

This article describes a qualitative evaluation of the Seniors Active Living in Vulnerable Elders (ALIVE) program, a 10-month health promotion program for low income seniors. Program interventions delivered in seniors' apartment buildings included exercise classes, health information sessions (i.e., health corners), and newsletters. The evaluation examined program participation, program impacts, and how the program worked. The most frequent reason for joining the program was recognizing the benefits of exercise, and the most frequent reason for not attending the program was having other priorities. The main participant impact was "feeling better." Specific impacts were also noted in physical, mental, and social domains. Fun, program delivery adaptations, autonomy, social interactions, and staff-participant relationships were discovered to be important program processes. These processes all contributed to participant's "comfort" in the program. How and why the program worked is examined in relation to Pender's (1996) revised health promotion model and implications for nursing are indicated.

Nurses can identify older adults who may benefit from programs that provide the support necessary for them to continue living in the community.

This experiment examined the accuracy of capillary blood glucose monitoring using the visual glucose oxidase strip (Chemstrip) procedure. Also, the effects of a certification program for nurses on the accuracy of glucose oxidase strip monitoring by registered nurses were analyzed. Seventy nurses and 123 patients participated. Data were collected from nurses' recordings of visual Chemstrip procedure results and from the concurrent laboratory blood glucose determinations for 3 months. The data included 70 Chemstrip recordings and 70 concurrent laboratory blood glucose recordings in the experimental group and 68 Chemstrip and 68 concurrent laboratory glucose recordings in the control group. Data analysis revealed that the accuracy of the nurses' performance of the glucose oxidase strip procedure was inadequate. A certification program did, however, dramatically improve the accuracy of the procedure. Proximity of time between the certification program and the performance of the glucose oxidase strip procedure did not affect accuracy.