Brittany Leatham

HS 490
STEP ONE
Experiencing a healthy life is all about balance, connectedness and overall
happiness. Improving individual quality of life and promoting long-term
wellness across all populations is how we can bring ourselves one step closer
to a healthier nation. Assessing quality of life is not a definitive measurement
but more of a multidimensional approach. Our health is a reflection of social,
emotional, physical, and mental aspects of our daily lives and how these
concepts affect our wellbeing. This can be hard for most to achieve but is
crucial in living and celebrating a happy, healthy life.

STEP TWO
The below statistics are provided from the Community Commons Community
Health Needs Assessment.
Demographic Data Latah County State comparison

Median Age 28.5 years old 35.5 years old

Language other than English spoken at 0.78% 2.8%

home

On-time high school graduation rate 90.7% 81.5%

Bachelors degree 46.65% 25.86%

Median household income $64,079 $57,573

Percentage of persons below Federal 21.64% 15.47%

Poverty Level

Unemployment rate 2.8% 3.6%

Lack of social and emotional support 12.5% 16.4%

Food access (grocery stores) 18.8 16.1

establishments per establishments per
100,000 100,000
population population

Recreation and fitness facility access 10.74 8 9.4 8

establishments per establishments per
 100,000 100,000
population population

Estimated adults drinking excessively 22.1% 14.7%

Primary physicians rate per 100,000 78.1 70.5

population

Availability of health promoting facilities and resources are higher in

Latah County versus the Idaho average among many categories which
improve quality of life. Overall, the education level is higher which shows
correlation to income level. Income and financial situations are one of the
leading sources of high stress levels in reference to both high and low
income levels. Employment also is a large indicator of quality of life which
further relates to income level. The unemployment rate is considerably lower
in Latah County which leads to more circulation of currency in the community
as well as prospects of future employment opportunities. Something
unsettling that was reported is the lack of social and emotional support
available to both populations.
The average age in Latah County is substantially lower than the
average age in Idaho due to the location of the University of Idaho (UI).
Living on a college campus allows its students to access what some of the
general population might not have available. The UI is very committed to
improving the overall wellbeing of their students by offering them services
such as health care, recreational facilities and events, health promotion
education and much more through the Vandal Health organization. Many
services are also available for the general public to access as well. By having
a college campus within the county brings plenty of advantages such as
people travelling into Latah for college events which draws business to the
local community.

STEP THREE
Unintentional injury/mortality rate
Health outcome Latah Idaho National
 County
Mortality due to unintentional 50.1 45.08 39.2
injury
Infant mortality per 1,000 births 5.3 6 6.5
Cancer mortality per 100,000 153.5 156.1 166.3
pop.
Heart disease mortality per 150.1 152.7 171.8
100,000 pop.
Lung disease mortality per 34.81 49.18 45.92
100,000 pop.
Premature death measured in 5,786 6,218 6,588
years of potential lives lost per
100,000 pop.
Unintentional injuries are higher in Latah County than in Idaho and
significantly higher than the national level. As referenced in Table 1 below,
levels of males are much higher across all areas than womens levels. The
high statistic in Latah County could reflect the fact that the average age of
the general population is much lower. College students especially may have
more dangerous behaviors due to high stress levels, relatively easy access to
alcohol (whether provided for a minor or someone of age) and some social
norms surrounded by alcohol and other recreational drugs.

Table 1
Both infant mortality and any reported disease mortality rates are
lower than the Idaho and national average. Infant mortality could be related
to many different health outcomes. Latah County is lower than the national
average in percentage of population living below the Federal Poverty Line.
The teen birth rate in Latah is also considerably low. Babies born into lower
income households and those born to teen mothers have a higher rate of
infant mortality due to lack of health care, lack of financial stability, possibly
birth defects due to unsafe sex practices, poor nutrition for mother and baby,
etc.

Cancer incidence per 100,000 population

Health outcome Latah County Idaho National
Breast 128.9 119.4 123.41
Colon and 34.7 37.1 40.59
rectum
Prostate 119.2 131.8 123.41
Lung 50.6 51.1 62.62

With cancer types among populations, it is important to look at types

of cancer to better combat the tissue and plan appropriate intervention
strategies and programs. Breast cancer is the only category that Latah
County did not rank lower than the national average in. Early screening is
important in the detection of cancers which is well discussed and voiced on
the UI campus through events available to students and public.

STEP FOUR
Quality of life can be greatly impacted by how active an individual is
and how often they participate in favored recreational activities. Exercise has
been proven to be beneficial on a short-term and long-term scale. Regular
exercise has been shown to lead to a healthier life by improving
cardiovascular health, lowering rates of heart attack and lung disease (both
lead causes of death) as well as improving emotional and mental states.
According to the Community Health Needs Assessment provided on
Community Commons, the national average of those who self-report physical
inactivity is 21.8%. In Latah County, the percentage is 15.8%. This again
could be due to the younger population as well as having access to multiple
recreational facilities. Reported by the Community Commons, Latah County
residents have a higher access to recreational and fitness facilities than
those on a national scale.
A study conducted by McGrath, OMalley and Hendrix compared three
different types of exercise and the length of exercise to how they affected
the quality of life among healthy adults. The researchers studied Pilates,
strength training and step aerobics. Positive physical health promotors were
shown to come from all three of the activities researched such as improving
sleep health, enhancing cardio vascular health, promoting weight loss, and
improving strength. Mental and emotional aspects of health that benefitted
from the activities were decreasing anger, depression and fatigue which
improve overall mental health. Lower anger scores were found in association
to higher intensity activities. Longer duration of exercise led to a higher
increase in health related quality of life (HRQOL) measured using the RAND
Short Form Health Survey used to assess HRQOL. Most participants in the
study were young adult to middle-aged women who had been participating in
exercise for more than 10 years. Figure 1 shows how the participants from
Pilates, strength training and step aerobics measured their HRQOL to RANDs
baseline average.
STEP FIVE
Considering environmental factors that are most closely reflect quality
of life, social and physical environments should be focused on. To improve
quality of life, individuals must have accessible and adequate resources to do
so. Recreational areas, educational institutions, employment opportunities,
areas for relaxation, health care facilities and professionals, and so many
more need to be available to the general public. State and county wide
policies must also be involved. Clean parks, recreational areas, water control
and air quality control fall under governmental responsibility.
To assess the quality of living spaces and available resources, we need
to reach people on a community level as well as an individual level. Phone
interviews and surveys sent to each house in a community would assess the
quality of the community as viewed on an individual level. Questions should
include how far available resources are, if there is available transportation, if
these resources cost money, how busy the area is, how much individuals
enjoy having those spaces, etc. Observations can also be conducted by
seeing how often individuals take advantage of the areas available, how long
individuals stay, if interpersonal interactions take place, etc.

STEP SIX
PREDISPOSING FACTORS
In a study conducted by Stefano Tartaglia, predictors of quality of life
were researched in an urban area. The study was self-reported via survey.
Four specific evaluations were focused on: socio-demographic
characteristics, perceived social support, place attachment and healthy
lifestyle. In reference to socio-demographic characteristics, financial status
was the main predictors in quality of life. Lower income households proved to
have a lower perception of this. Mental health is a large measurement on this
health topic. Having a good sense of perceived social support is important in
dealing with traumas, life changes and everyday life events. It was found
that having a supportive family structure and a significant other helped on
an individual level. Place attachment was evaluated because sense of
community and belonging is important in living a healthy life. As expected
physically active lifestyles were significantly important when it came to
individual perceived quality of life.
Individual surveys were used in this study which I believe are one of
the most beneficial tools in obtaining this type of information. Door-to-door
paper surveys, phone interviews and surveys that can be completed on
social media or through email that are contain easily comprehensible
vocabulary and are easy to submit should be included. In-person interviews
would be more beneficial than surveys. Participants must be willing to
corporate which might unfortunately create bias. Those who are passionate
about a topic are more willing to engage. Someone with a very high
perceived level of quality of life or someone a very low perceived quality of
life might be willing to more easily involve themselves in these types of
studies.
ENABLING FACTORS
The best thing that can be done when attempting to improve quality of
life is ensuring that the resources and knowledge are available. Providing
sufficient schools allows for obtaining a decent education which in turn
relates to socio-economic status, financial stability, quality environmental
spaces and much more. Policies need to reflect this on a county and
state levels which requires active involvement from community government.
Sufficient government funds and resources will greatly impact quality of life
in all areas. Social norms surrounding perception of quality of life must be
altered or improved. Simply being aware that quality of life is affected by all
aspects of our health must be understood by individuals so that they can
strive to increase their lives in any aspects they find lacking.

REINFORCING FACTORS
Latah County, specifically Moscow, presents an overall sense of
belonging and love for the community. Downtown Moscow is home to many
facilities that promote health and wellbeing. There is a local Co-Op grocery
store which provides fresh, healthy produce, live music for public enjoyment,
affordable organic choices in food and medicine and a friendly staff that help
their patrons feel comfortable. Many of our local restaurants serve local meat
and produce which provides the community with accessible nutrition as well
as involving themselves with the local economy. Latah County is filled with
local parks which contain many sport and recreational areas as well as a few
aquatic centers. The UI provides more for the community on a mental health
level. Vandal Health is very committed to the work they do and is available to
students and everyone in the Latah community.

STEP SEVEN
The most important target population that need help assessing quality
of life would be those who do not have available access to resources to
improve quality of life. These resources include education, employment to
ensure financial stability, recreational areas, quality environments and health
care services. Populations need to be balanced and assessed on all social,
physical, emotional and environmental aspects to ensure overall well-being.
Socio-demographic characteristics should be focused on most when
assessing and improving quality of life. With a low income, individuals might
have access to a lower education level and an environment not well suited
for a positive life. Mental states may also be weaker in low income
individuals because they could be exposed to higher stressors than someone
who is financially secure.

STEP EIGHT
As mentioned above, Vandal Health would be a great resource to reach
out to involving this health topic. They conduct studies and hold events all
around campus and some in the Moscow community. In designing a
committee, we would require someone very passionate about the topic at
hand and hold support through the community involved. They also must hold
some degree of credibility on the topic. These people could be elected
officials, activists, religious or business leaders who have attended
community events or served on committees. These will help build credibility
for the topic at hand.
Those most affected could be on the UI campus itself. To improve
students quality of life, we could look at quite a few aspects involved. For
some students, they find the stresses of school to be too intense. To lessen
that, we could somehow create a way that makes students feel more
comfortable approaching their teachers and accessing their help and
resources. To improve physical activity among students, we could involve the
student recreation center. Classes and events are available here but we
could help spread the knowledge of what exactly is available.
 REFERENCES

CDC Health Disparities & Inequalities Report (CHDIR). (2015, September 10).
Retrieved March 27, 2017, from
https://www.cdc.gov/minorityhealth/chdireport.html

Community Commons. (n.d.). Retrieved March 26, 2017, from

https://assessment.communitycommons.org/CHNA/report?
page=5&id=306&reporttype=libraryCHNA

Mcgrath, J. A., OMalley, M., & Hendrix, T. J. (2010). Group exercise mode and
health-related quality of life among healthy adults. Journal of Advanced
Nursing, 67(3), 491-500. Retrieved March 26, 2017, from ebscohost.com.

Tartaglia, S. (2012, September 01). Different Predictors of Quality of Life in

Urban Environment. Retrieved March 27, 2017, from
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/257664176_Different_Predictors_of
_Quality_of_Life_in_Urban_Environment