Summarizing the intervention plan
There is need to adopt a comprehensive public health approach towards the diagnosis, screening, prevention and overall management of heart diseases and stroke. Such an approach should entail a thorough intervention or action plan aimed at lowering the prevalence rates for the two terminal conditions. Individuals who are still healthy and free from either heart complications or stroke can still prevent themselves from the conditions if an effective intervention plan is put in place. This implies that the process requires a three-dimensional strategy for managing the terminal conditions. Even in the case whereby prevention fails, an effective public health intervention strategy should be in a position to manage the complications (Mayo, Bronstein, Scott, Finch, & Miller, 2014).
Hence, this intervention plan against heart diseases and stroke seeks to develop an action framework that will employ a sequence of at least six broad strategies. The strategies embraced by this intervention plan adhere to the key tenets of Healthy People 2010 (Govil, Weidner, Merritt-Worden, & Ornish, 2009). It aims at eradicating health disparities and improving the quality of life among individuals who have been diagnosed with terminal conditions.
The intervention plan will also focus on disease prevention and health promotion measures that can be adopted to curtail the two complications. The target population is also of great essence in this intervention plan. The existing imbalance in regards to the population affected by stroke and heart diseases should also be addressed by this type of intervention plan (Cossman et al., 2008).
The potential formative and summative approaches to the evaluation plan
This intervention plan comprises a number of key components. To begin with, it is crucial to define action areas that demand immediate redress. Heart-related diseases and stroke are widespread especially in developed economies. Hence, it is not possible to create an intervention plan in all the various dimensions of the terminal conditions (Fernández-san-martín et al., 2014). Only the essential components should be addressed at the beginning of this intervention plan.
This intervention and health promotion plan should be initiated by taking an immediate action. In other words, the current pool of knowledge (on stroke and heart diseases) should be put to work. It ought to be a priority area for healthcare agencies. They should begin acting on what is already known before engaging in costly and time-consuming Research and Development (R&D) studies. The most viable policies should be implemented. As a matter of fact, the latter is expected to be the greatest area of concern. Some of the main requirements at the initial intervention phase include organizational arrangements, adequate partnerships, innovative leadership and effective communication (Cossman et al., 2008).
At this stage, the existing promising policies can only be successfully implemented if adequate resources and explicit mandates are availed to health agencies at the local, state and federal levels.
The existing health promotion and intervention strategies should be strengthened in terms of capacity. Partnerships and public health agencies should be restructured and transformed in terms of performance. The manner in which public health agencies are organized greatly determines the effectiveness of the action plan put in place. The public health workforce should also be strengthened by improving the existing resources and competences. Needles to say, new capacities must be developed by public health agencies. The prevention of the two complications also demand innovative partnerships and established networks. Hence, these should be established so that the health promotion and intervention plan can be successful.
The evaluation plan including tools, process and data analysis
The disease burden will have to be monitored on a regular and continuous basis. This will necessitate the need to measure the statistical progress of the intervention and health promotion plan (Bamford, Rothwell, KTyrrell, & Boaden, 2013). On the same note, it will be the responsibility of public health agencies to communicate urgent matters so that pertinent actions can be taken.
The evaluation perspective focuses on the effectiveness or impacts of actions put in place from the initial phase of the intervention plan. For example, both stroke and heart diseases pose a major public health burden. Therefore, all the aspects of the intervention plan should be assessed comprehensively and continuously. Evaluating impacts should be the cornerstone of the actions taken to curtail the terminal conditions. Effective interventions at this stage also require articulate identification of opportunities. Public health agencies must also be able to predict and assess the effects of the actions taken.
As it stands now, priority populations can hardly be evaluated and planned owing to lack of essential information. Data is required to evaluate the impacts of health promotion and intervention plan (Bamford, Rothwell, KTyrrell, & Boaden, 2013).
A number of source data will be required for this health promotion and intervention plan. Some of the crucial data sources that ought to be used include survival and disability rates, mortality, frequencies of hospitalization, case fatality, recurrence of stroke and heart-related diseases, treatment and control, detection status, risk factors and their prevalence levels, incidence, behavioral patterns as well as environmental conditions.
Bamford, D., Rothwell, K., Tyrrell, P., & Boaden, R. (2013). Improving care for people after stroke: How change was actively facilitated. Journal of Health Organization and Management, 27(5), 548-60.
Cossman, R. E., Cossman, J. S., James, W. L., Blanchard, T., Thomas, R. K., Pol, L. G.,… Mirvis, D. M. (2008). Evaluating Heart Disease Presciptions-Filled as a Proxy for Heart Disease Prevalence Rates. Journal of Health and Human Services Administration, 30(4), 503-528.
Fernández-san-martín, M. I., Martín-lópez, L. M., Masa-font, R., Olona-tabueña, N., Roman, Y., Martin-royo, J.,… Flores-mateo, G. (2014). The effectiveness of lifestyle interventions to reduce cardiovascular risk in patients with severe mental disorders: Meta-analysis of intervention studies. Community Mental Health Journal, 50(1), 81-95.
Govil, S. R., Weidner, G., Merritt-Worden, T., & Ornish, D. (2009). Socioeconomic status and improvements in lifestyle, coronary risk factors, and quality of life: The multisite cardiac lifestyle intervention program. American Journal of Public Health, 99(7), 1263-1270.
Mayo, N. E., Bronstein, D., Scott, S. C., Finch, L. E., & Miller, S. (2014). Necessary and sufficient causes of participation post-stroke: Practical and philosophical perspectives. Quality of Life Research, 23(1), 39-47.