Published date: Feb 07 2022

Journal Title: KnE Life Sciences

Issue title: 5th International Conference in Nursing (IVCN)

Pages: 954–967

DOI: 10.18502/kls.v7i2.10395

Yasinta Betanyasinta_betan@yahoo.comNursing Department, Citra Bangsa University, Indonesia

Maria Yasintha GoaNursing Department, Citra Bangsa University, Indonesia

The Healthy Indonesia Program is part of the nine priorities agenda of President Jokowi Dodo and Vice President Jusuf Kalla, namely relating to improving the quality of life of Indonesians. The success of the Healthy Indonesia Program, which uses a family approach, is measured by the healthy family index which is a combination of 12 indicators. This study aimed to present data for the healthy family index and the 12 healthy family indicators for remote areas. This was a descriptive cross-sectional study which was conducted during April 2019 in remote areas of East Nusa Tenggara, Indonesia. 320 households participated in the study, consisting of 1,293 people. Proportional random sampling was used to select the participants. Data on the healthy family index were collected using a healthy family profile questionnaire. The results of this study indicated that there are several indicators that need to be considered by the Government. First, most couples of reproductive age (61% of 288 households) do not use contraception. Second, most families have family members who are active smokers (70% of the 320 households). Next, only 33% of the 14 tuberculosis patients and 49% of the 144 hypertension patients receive standard treatment. Finally, 100% of the six people with mental health disorders in this study do not receive appropriate treatment. This study also showed that the majority of people in these remote areas were identified as pre-healthy families. This study provides basic data on 12 indicators of healthy families that are essential for further research and for the Government to further develop the Healthy Indonesia Program in this research area. All families in remote areas should be visited regularly by health workers, and these health workers are expected to increase health promotion related to the problematic indicators identified.

Keywords: family approach, Healthy Indonesia Program, healthy family, healthy indicators

[1] Kementrian Kesehatan Republik Indonesia. Program Indonesia sehat dengan pendekatan keluarga. Jakarta. 2017. Available from: http://www.depkes.go.id/article/view/17070700004/program-indonesia-sehatdengan- pendekatan-keluarga.html

[2] Friedman MM, Bowden VR, Jones E. Family nursing: Research, theory & practice. 5th ed. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall; 2003.

[3] Kanal Kesehatan. Peringkat kabupaten kota dalam program indonesia sehat dengan pendekatan keluarga di nusa tenggara, maluku, dan Papua. NTB. 2018. Available from: https://www.kanal-kesehatan.com/5177-peringkat-kabupatenkota- dalam-pispk-di-nusa-tenggara-maluku-dan-papua

[4] World Health Organization. Countries need to do what works to improve contraceptive access, provision and choice for women and girls. Geneva: WHO; 2017. Available from: https://www.who.int/reproductivehealth/topics/family_planning/contraceptiveaccess- women-and-girls/en/

[5] World Health Organization. Family planning/contraception. Geneva: WHO; 2018. Available from: https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/family-planningcontraception

[6] Ackerson K, Zielinski R. Factors influencing use of family planning in women living in crisis affected areas of Sub-Saharan Africa: A review of the literature. Midwifery. 2017;54:35-60. doi: 10.1016/j.midw.2017.07.021

[7] Obwoya JG,Wulifan JK, Kalolo A. Factors influencing contraceptives use among women in the Juba City of South Sudan. International Journal of Population Research. 2018. https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/6381842

[8] Kaniki FR. Factors influencing the use of modern contraceptive methods among rural women of child bearing age in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Journal of family medicine and primary care. 2019;8(8):2582–6. doi:10.4103/jfmpc.jfmpc_345_19

[9] Roberts ME, Doogan NJ, Kurti AN, et al. Rural tobacco use across the United States: How rural and urban areas differ, broken down by census regions and divisions. Health Place. 2016;39:153-9. doi: 10.1016/j.healthplace.2016.04.001

[10] Centers and Diseases Control and Prevention. Tobacco use by geographic region. CDC; 2019 [cited 2019 Aug 8]. Available from: https://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/disparities/geographic/index.htm

[11] Buettner-Schmidt K, Miller DR, Maack B. Disparities in rural tobacco use, smoke-free policies, and tobacco taxes. Western journal of nursing research. 2019;41(8):1184– 1202. doi:10.1177/0193945919828061

[12] Roberts ME, Doogan NJ, Kurti AN. Rural tobacco use across the United States: How rural and urban areas differ, broken down by census regions and divisions. Health Place. 2016;39:153–9. doi:10.1016/j.healthplace.2016.04.001

[13] Barnoya J, Navas-Acien A. Protecting the world from secondhand tobacco smoke exposure: Where do we stand and where do we go from here?. Nicotine & Tobacco Research. 2013;15(4):789–804. doi:10.1093/ntr/nts200

[14] Badan perencanaan pembangunan daerah provinsi Banten. Laporan akhir penelitian kajian pengembangan model penanganan penyakit gangguan jiwa berbasis masyarkat. Banten : 2017. Available from: https://bappeda.bantenprov.go.id/ lama/upload/PPID/KAJIAN/KAJIAN%202017%20-%20Penanganan%20Penyakit% 20Gangguan%20Jiwa%20Berbasis%20Masyarakat.pdf