Understanding the Lifestyle Risk Profile of Men and Their Engagement With Preventive Care: A Cross-Sectional Survey.
Ruth Mursa, Gemma McErlean, Christopher Patterson and 1 others
PMID 39227178WHAT IT FOUND
Australian men recruited through a volunteer fire service: 77.9% were classified overweight/obese by calculated BMI, but only 33.3% of those aged 18 to 64 met activity guidelines.
Many had a regular GP and checks. Routine visits are a chance for nurses to discuss lifestyle risk.
Key findings
0177.9% of respondents were considered overweight/obese based on calculated BMI, and only 18.6% were within the healthy body mass index range.
0272.8% described themselves as being in good or very good health, but only 33.3% of those aged 18 to 64 met current physical activity and strength guidelines, and only 11.1% reported eating the recommended five servings of vegetables per day.
0379.8% had a regular GP/general practice, and having a regular GP/general practice was significantly associated with all preventive and screening activities except having a dental check.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for RNs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
The study was cross-sectional and descriptive, so it cannot show that lifestyle risk, GP attendance or preventive checks caused any outcome. Participants were recruited purposively from a volunteer fire service, so they may not represent all Australian men, especially those from diverse ethnic and cultural backgrounds. All health, diet, activity and alcohol data were self-reported online, so reporting bias is possible. Body size was estimated from self-reported height and weight using calculated BMI, which is a proxy and not a direct physical measure. The survey was not powered with a sample size calculation because it was descriptive; 74 of 505 responses were excluded for missing more than 50% of items or duplicates. Many survey items were investigator-developed and only pilot tested for face and content validity. Health literacy data were reported separately, so this paper does not show how health literacy related to the findings.
Declared interests
The authors declared no conflicts of interest. The supplied text does not state a funding source.
The easy way to misread this
Do not read this as evidence that general practice nurse advice reduces men's lifestyle risk or improves health. This was a descriptive cross-sectional survey of men recruited from a volunteer fire service; it reports self-reported risk profiles and associations, not a tested intervention or cause.