Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Archives of Public Health
Published in: Archives of Public Health 1/2019

Open Access 01-12-2019 | Research

A toolkit with nine district types to support municipalities in taking an integrated approach to prevention

Authors: Ilse Storm, Nikkie Post, Antonia Verweij, Karlijn Leenaars

Published in: Archives of Public Health | Issue 1/2019

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Not only do people differ in their health, so do districts within municipalities. For example, city centres have different characteristics and health issues than villages or post-war neighbourhoods. This is why the Dutch National Institute for Public Health and the Environment has developed a toolkit, ‘Prevention in the district’, based on nine different types of district.

Methods

The aim of the toolkit is to help municipalities implement an integrated approach to prevention by providing tailored, practical information. We therefore looked at the best way to improve the connection between the available knowledge and local needs. Based on data analysis, expert opinion and working sessions with professionals and local policymakers, we developed a toolkit with three related tools.

Results

The following tools were developed: 1) nine district types with their prominent characteristics and 14 themes for prevention (ranging from loneliness to overweight); 2) a data guide containing a set of indicators to assess the district health profile; 3) a prevention guide containing a mix of evidence-based interventions for the 14 themes. The tools are presented in a toolkit (a clickable PDF) to emphasise the fact that they form a coherent whole. The link between data and interventions is considered to be particularly innovative.

Conclusion

The three tools support the improvement of the health and well-being of residents in a district. The first indications are that the toolkit empowers municipalities and lets them work towards an integrated approach. An integrated approach in both district health profiles and district plans could also serve as an example for other countries.
Literature
1.
VNG. Tijdig en doordacht Over preventie bij maatschappelijke opgaven en de rol van gemeenten [Timely and thought through. On prevention in social-service tasks and the role of municipalities]. The Hague: the Association of Dutch Municipalities; 2018.
2.
Storm I. Thesis. Towards a HiAP cycle. Health in All Policies as a practice-based improvement process. Amsterdam: VU Amsterdam; 2016.
3.
Steenbakkers M. Lokaal integraal gezondheidsbeleid: realistische uitdaging of utopie? Een onderzoek binnen gemeenten naar mogelijkheden tot intersectorale samenwerking [Local Health in All Policies: realistic challenge or utopia?]. Maastricht: Academische Werkplaats Publieke Gezondheid Limburg, Universiteit Maatstricht; 2012.
4.
5.
Whitehead M, Dahlgren G. Leveling up part 1; concepts and principles for tackling social inequities in health. Copenhagen: World Health Organization Regional Office for Europe; 2006.
6.
Kickbusch I, Gleicher D. Governance for health in the 21st century: a study conducted for the WHO regional Office for Europe. WHO Regional Office for Europe: Copenhagen; 2011.
7.
Mannheimer LN, Lehto J, Ostlin P. Window of opportunity for intersectoral health policy in Sweden--open, half-open or half-shut? Health Promot Int. 2007;22(4):307–15.CrossRef
8.
Puska P, Stahl T. Health in all policies-the Finnish initiative: background, principles, and current issues. Annu Rev Public Health. 2010;31:315–28.CrossRef
9.
Peters D, Harting J, Oers van H, Schuit AJ, Vries de N, Stronks K. Manifestations of integrated public health policy in Dutch municipalities. Health Promot Int. 2014;31(2):290–302.CrossRef
10.
11.
12.
VWS. Nationaal Preventieakkoord [The National Prevention Agreement]. The Hague: Ministry of Health, Welfare and Sport; 2013.
13.
14.
Pharos and Platform31. Gezond in de stad . Stimuleringsprogramma lokale aanpak gezondheidsachterstanden [Health in the City. Programme aimed at reducing health inequalities]. http://​www.​gezondin.​nu/​. Accessed 1 Dec 2018.
15.
Keuzenkamp S. Decentralisatie en de bestuurskracht van de gemeente [decentralization and the administrative power of the municipalitie]. The Hague: The Netherlands Institute for Social Research; 2019.
16.
17.
Storm I, den HF, van JAM O, Schuit AJ. How to imporve collaboration between the public health sector and other policy sectors to reduce health inequalities – A study in sixteen municipalities in the Netherlands. Int J Equity Health. 2016;15:97.CrossRef
18.
Leenaars K. Thesis.The care sport connector in the Netherlands. Wageningen: Wageningen University; 2017.
19.
Lavis J, Boyko JA, Oxman AD, Lewin S, Fretheim A. SUPPORT tools for evidence-informed health policy making (STP) 14: Organising and using policy dialogues to support evidence-informed policy making. Health Res Policy Syst. 2009;7(Suppl 1):S14.CrossRef
20.
Storm I, Gestel van A, Goor van de I, van JAM O. How can collaboration be strengthened between public health and primary care? A Dutch multiple case study in seven neighbourhoods. BMC Public Health. 2015;15:974.CrossRef
21.
22.
Ruijsbroek J. Thesis. Health and the neighbourhood. Processes and changes in the neighbourhood and the impact on health. Amsterdam: University of Amsterdam; 2017.
23.
24.
Kassteele van de J, Zwakhals L, Breugelmans O, Ameling C, Brink van den C. Estimating the prevalence of 26 health-related indicators at neighbourhood level in the Netherlands using structured additive regression. Int J Health Geogr. 2017;16 (1):23.
25.
RIVM. Grip op preventie. Magazine voor gemeenten over integraal werken aan welzijn en gezondheid [in control of prevention. Magazine for municipalities about an integral approach to welfare and health]. Bilthoven: RIVM; 2019. Accessed 1 Sept 2019.
26.
27.
Koeling R. Organizing activities: knowledge utilization among health promotion professionals, in health and life sciences. Amsterdam: VU University; 2018.
28.
Vaandrager L, Wagemakers A, Saan H. Evidence in gezondheidsbevordering [evidence in public health promotion]. TSG. 2010;88:271–7.CrossRef
29.
Bekker M, Steenbakkers M, Storm I, Jansen MWJ. From instruments towards programme for HiAP decision-support? Health Impact Assessment in the Netherlands. In: O’Mullane M. (Editor). Integrating Health Impact Assessment into the Policy Process: Lesssons and Experiences from Around the World. Oxford; 2013.
30.
Hendriks A-M, Habraken J, Jansen MWJ, Gubbel JS, Vries de NK, van JAM O, Michie S, Atkins L, Kremers SPJ. ‘Are we there yet?’ - operationalizing the concept of integrated public health policies. Health Policy. 2014;114:174–82.CrossRef
31.
32.
33.
34.
35.
36.
Droomers M, Harting J, Jongenneel-Grimen B, Rutten L, Kats van J, Stronks K. Area-based interventions to ameliorate deprived Dutch neighborhoods in practice: does the Dutch District approach address the social determinants of health to such an extent that future health impacts may be expected? Prev Med. 2014;61:122–7.CrossRef
37.
BZK. Decentralisatiebrief kabinet [Cabinet decentralisation memorandum]. The Hague: Ministry of the Interior and Kingdom Relations; 2013.
38.
39.
40.
41.
Bräunling S, Rostosky S, Pospiech S. Wie gewinnt man Erwerbslose für die Teilnahme an Gesundheitsförderungsangeboten im Stadtteil? Berlin: Gesundheit Berlin-Brandenburg; 2017.
42.
Heijink R, Struijs J. Preventie in het zorgstelsel:wat kunnen we leren van het buitenland? Een eerste inventarisatie op basis van interviews met buitenlandse experts en literatuur [prevention in the healthcare system: what can we learn from other countries? An initial survey based on interviews with foreign experts and the literature]. Bilthoven: RIVM; 2016.
Metadata
Title
A toolkit with nine district types to support municipalities in taking an integrated approach to prevention
Authors
Ilse Storm
Nikkie Post
Antonia Verweij
Karlijn Leenaars
Publication date
01-12-2019
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
Archives of Public Health / Issue 1/2019
Electronic ISSN: 2049-3258
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13690-019-0378-5

Other articles of this Issue 1/2019

Archives of Public Health 1/2019 Go to the issue

Research

The influence of ergonomic breastfeeding training on some health parameters in infants and mothers: a randomized controlled trial

Research

From monitoring to action: utilising health survey data in national policy development and implementation in Finland

Research

Assessing effectiveness of a novel mid-upper arm circumference Z-score tape in a community setting in Guatemala

Research

Attitude of primiparous women towards their preference for delivery method: a qualitative content analysis

Research

EFSA’s toxicological assessment of aspartame: was it even-handedly trying to identify possible unreliable positives and unreliable negatives?

Research

Self-rated health and smoking among physicians and general population with higher education in Estonia: results from cross-sectional studies in 2002 and 2014