Do socio-cultural factors influence college students’ self-rated health status and health-promoting lifestyles? A cross-sectional multicenter study in Dalian, China

Abstract

BackgroundAn unhealthy lifestyle of college students is an important public health concern, but few studies have been undertaken to examine the role of socio-cultural differences.MethodsFor this cross-sectional comparative study, data on college students’ health-promoting lifestyles (HPL), as measured using the Health-Promoting Lifestyle Profile (HPLP-II) scale, and self-rated health status (SRH) as measured by Sub-Optimal Health Measurement Scale (SHMS V1.0) were collected from 829 college students.ResultsThe sample of 829 college students included 504 (60.8%) Chinese and 325 (39.2%) international students. Chinese students had higher scores in overall health-promoting lifestyle (HPL) (P < 0.001, eta squared =0.113) and in all the six subclasses than their international counterparts. In relation to health status evaluation, the two groups varied in physiological health (P < 0.001, eta squared = 0.095) and social health (P = 0.020, eta squared = 0.007) but there was no significant difference in psychological health subscale (P = 0.156, eta squared = 0.002). HPL was predicted by financial status among the Chinese group and by student’s major, age and level of education in the international group. Body mass index (BMI) and financial status emerged as predictors of the three subscales of SHMS V1.0 in the Chinese group and also of physiological and psychological subscales in the international group. Gender was associated with psychological health in both groups. Smoking status was a predictor of psychological health in both groups and also of social health in the international group. The level of education emerged as a predictor of social health in the international group.Regression analyses revealed a significant association between health status and healthy lifestyle (P < 0.001). In reference to participants with “excellent” lifestyle, participants with moderate lifestyle were at a 4.5 times higher risk of developing suboptimal health status (SHS) (OR: 4.5,95% CI:2.2-9.99) and those with a ‘general’ lifestyle were at a 3.2 times higher risk SHS (OR: 3.2, 95% CI: 1.5-7.18). Good and moderate HPLP-II levels of nutrition are associated with low risk of suboptimal health status (OR: 0,41 and 0,25, respectively). Participants in good and moderate HPLP-II levels of interpersonal relations are associated with higher risk of suboptimal health (OR:2,7 and 3,01 respectively) than those in excellent levels of HPLP-II.ConclusionCollectively, these findings provide a convincing body of evidence to support the role of socio-cultural factors as key determinants of the HPL and SRH of college students.

Influence of Type D personality on quality of life in university students: The mediating effect of health‐promoting behavior and subjective health status

“…Scores for HPB and subjective health status were lower in Type D students than non‐Type D students. These findings are consistent with previous studies, which show that Type D personality is associated with health status and HPB (Gilmour & Williams, 2012; Williams et al, 2016) and that subjective health status and HPB are associated with university students' QoL (Ahn et al, 2014; Chen et al, 2017; Lolokote et al, 2017; Seo et al, 2018; Tol et al, 2013). Therefore, management of HPB and subjective health status as mediating factors could help improve QoL among students with Type D personality.…”

“…Students' years at university are a crucial period for forming HPB and can affect their health status throughout their later adulthood (Arias‐Palencia et al, 2015; Seo et al, 2018). Because HPB, health status, and QoL are closely related during this period (Chen et al, 2017; Lolokote et al, 2017; Seo et al, 2018), health care providers should be conscious of these factors among university students. To explain why certain people are healthier than others, a wide variety of personality concepts and their relationships with health outcomes have been studied.…”

“…HPB are associated with perceived health status (Ahn, Park, & Ra, 2014; Lolokote, Hidru, & Li, 2017), and unhealthy behaviors may increase college students' risk of poor health (Chen et al, 2017). HPB are also associated with QoL (Seo et al, 2018; Tol, Tavassoli, Shariferad, & Shojaeezadeh, 2013), which is reportedly higher in university students with healthy physical activity, diet, and drinking habits (Seo et al, 2018).…”

Psychometric properties of the health-promoting lifestyle profile II: cross-cultural validation of the Malay language version

“…Such research necessitates the use of reliable and valid measurement tools, which serve to enhance the international comparability of health data. The Health-Promoting Lifestyle Profile II (HPLP-II) is a widely-used instrument for evaluation of health behaviour [11,12] which has been validated in multiple studies [13][14][15]. Based on Pender's Health Promotion Model, it conceptualises an individual's health-promoting lifestyle in terms of the following dimensions; health responsibility, physical activity, nutrition, spiritual growth, interpersonal relations and stress management.…”

Efectividad del programa Reforma de Vida en los estilos de vida miembros de ci­rculos de salud de dos distritos de Arequipa

“…Asimismo, Ávila-Ulloa (17) en Chile y Bohórquez Santos et al (18) en Colombia, encontraron en adultos mayores que participaban de círculos de salud, sin uso de terapias complementarias, solo un 10 y 7% con estilos de vida "algo bajos". Estos resultados reafirman el concepto de que los estilos de vida están asociados al grupo etario y a factores sociales (19)(20)(21) ; los cuales son dos determinantes de salud que deberían ser tomados en cuenta al momento de realizar intervenciones para promoción de estilos de vida saludables en adultos mayores. Las cifras obtenidas en este estudio muestran también que, a diferencia de otras realidades, los estilos de vida en este grupo etario requieren intervenciones en salud por parte del estado, con el objetivo de prevenir la aparición y progresión de enfermedades crónicas no transmisibles y promover una vejez saludable.…”