Su Jin Kim; Min A Lee; Wookyoun Cho; Youngmee Lee; Jiyoung Choi; Eunju Park

doi:10.5720/kjcn.2019.24.2.127

Articles

Page Path: HOME > Korean J Community Nutr > Volume 24(2); 2019 > Article

Research Article
Analysis of the Participation Reasons and Deterrents on Welfare Facility Dietitians for the Elderly: Su Jin Kim, Min A Lee, Wookyoun Cho, Youngmee Lee, Jiyoung Choi, Eunju Park; Korean Journal of Community Nutrition 2019;24(2):127-136.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.5720/kjcn.2019.24.2.127
Published online: April 30, 2019

¹Department of Food and Nutrition, Kookmin University, Seoul, Korea, Student.

²Department of Food and Nutrition, Kookmin University, Seoul, Korea, Professor.

³Department of Food and Nutrition, Gachon University, Seongnam, Korea, Professor.

⁴Department of Food and Nutrition, Kyungnam University, Changwon, Korea, Student.

⁵Department of Food and Nutrition, Kyungnam University, Changwon, Korea, Professor.

Corresponding author: Eunju Park. Department of Food and Nutrition, Kyungnam University, Changwon 51352, Republic of Korea. Tel: (055) 249-2218, Fax: (055) 244-6504, pej@kyungnam.ac.kr

• Received: April 9, 2019 • Revised: April 19, 2019 • Accepted: April 22, 2019

This is an Open-Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

34 Views
0 Download

prev next

Full Article

Download PDF

Abstract
Acknowledgments
Acknowledgments
REFERENCES

Abstract

Objectives
This study analyzed the education participation reasons and deterrents of dietitians who work in welfare facilities for the elderly.
Methods
The survey was completed by 144 dietitians working at welfare facilities for the elderly in Korea. The survey was conducted in October, 2018, both on-line and off-line, based on the demographic characteristics, work status on welfare facilities for the elderly, Participation Reasons Scale (PRS) and Deterrents to Participation Scale (DPS-G). The data were analyzed using frequency analysis, descriptive analysis, factor analysis, reliability analysis, regressive analysis using SPSS ver. 25.0.
Results
The reason for participation were divided into three factors: ‘Responsibility of professional and self-development (5.76 ± 1.04)’, ‘Job stability and personal benefits (4.98 ± 1.28)’, and ‘Interaction and development of professional competencies (5.85 ± 1.00)’. ‘Interaction and development of professional competencies’ was the highest motivation factor. Also, the deterrents for participation were divided into four factors: ‘Dispositional barrier (2.70 ± 1.29)’, ‘Dissatisfaction of education usability (3.39 ± 1.38)’, ‘Institutional barrier (4.21 ± 1.45)’, and ‘Situational barrier (2.36 ± 1.30)’. ‘Institutional barrier’ showed the highest deterrents factor. In addition, ‘Responsibility of professional and self-development’ and ‘Interaction and development of professional competencies’ were negative attributes for ‘Dispositional barrier’ (p<0.001).
Conclusions
These results provide basic data to promote participation in education and contribute to the improvement of their job ability and education capacity of the food and nutrition management of welfare facilities for the elderly
Keywords: dietitian; reasons of participation; deterrents of participation; welfare facility for the elderly

Acknowledgments

This research was supported by a grant from the Korea Federation of Women's Science & Technology Association.

REFERENCES

1. Ministry of the Interior and Security. Resident population and household status [internet]. Ministry of the Interior and Security; 2018; cited 2019 Apr 04]. Available from: http://27.101.213.4/#.
2. Kang HS, Lee Y, Chae IS. Job importance, job performance, and job satisfaction in dietitians at geriatric hospitals or elderly healthcare facilities in Jeju. J Nutr Health 2016; 49(3): 189-200.Article PDF
3. Kim SU. Risk and social conflicts in ultra-low birth rate and super aged society. Korea Institute for Health and Social Affairs; 2014 12. Report No. 2014-22-1-7.
4. Kim JS. Customized food and meal service for the elderly: Its management and policy implications. Health Welf Forum 2018; 264:57-69.
5. Seo EH, Park EJ. Nutrition intake status of the elderly in residential welfare facilities by dietitian employment. J Korea Soc Wellness 2016; 11(4): 473-483.Article
6. Han GS, Yang EJ. Status of foodservice operations in long-term care facilities for the elderly: Focus on the Gwangju metropolitan city. J East Asian Soc Diet Life 2018; 28(5): 337-344.Article
7. Hong SY, Seo SH. Job performance frequency and the training needs of dieticians in elderly healthcare facilities. J Korean Diet Assoc 2010; 16(2): 160-177.
8. Cervero RM. Trends and issues in continuing professional education. New Dir Adult Contin Educ 2000; 2000(86): 3-12.Article
9. Sohn CM, Cho YY, Bea MY, Do EK, Na WR, Kim MS. Analysis of reasons for continuing education in dietitians. J Korean Diet Assoc 2013; 19(4): 416-423.Article
10. Murphy C, Cross C, McGuire D. The motivation of nurses to participate in continuing professional education in Ireland. J Eur Ind Train 2006; 30(5): 365-384.Article
11. Han SM, Lee HS. Nurses' reasons for participation in continuing nursing education. J Vocat Educ Res 2010; 29(2): 189-204.
12. Houle CO. Continuing learning in the professions. Mobius: A. J Contin Educ Prof Health Sci 1981; 1(1): 76-80.
13. Grotelueschen AD. Assessing professionals' reasons for participating in continuing education. New Dir Contin Educ 1985; 27:33-45.
14. Desilets LD. Assessing registered nurses' reasons for participating in continuing education. J Contin Educ Nurs 1995; 26(5): 202-208.PubMed
15. Aucoin JW. The comparison in participation in continuing nursing education between certified and non-certified staff development specialists. [master's thesis]. Louisiana State University Medical Center; 1997.
16. Hayajneh F. Attitudes of professional Jordanian nurses toward continuing education. J Contin Educ Nurs 2009; 40(1): 43-48.Article PubMed
17. Han EM. Participation motivation of adult learners in piano education, barriers to their piano education and their educational needs [master's thesis]. Chung-Ang University; 2011.
18. Chio US. An analytical study on conditions and nature of adult learners' participation for lifelong education. J Lifelong Learning Soc 2006; 2(1): 1-35.Article
19. Doray TE. Testing the universality of the generic deterrents to participation scale, Dps-g: a case study [dissertation]. Oklahoma State University; 1990.
20. Cross KP. Adult learners: Characteristics, needs and interests. In: Peterson RE, editor. Lifelong learning in America. Sanfrancisco: Jossey-Bass; 1979.
21. Muse CT. Cost benefit analysis, traditional vs. adult students. J Stud Finan Aid 1979; 9(3): 22-27.Article
22. Isaac EP. Barriers to adult education participation, distance education, and adult learning. Encycl Info Commun Tech Adult Educ Integr 2011; 1100-1112.
23. Darkenwald GG, Valentine T. Factor structure of deterrents to public participation in adult education. Adult Educ Q 1985; 35(4): 177-193.
24. The Korean Dietetic Association. Education information page [internet]. The Korean Dietetic Association; 2019; cited 2019 Apr 9]. Available from: https://www.dietitian.or.kr/work/education/ke_curefood_info.do.
25. Shin KE. A study on dietitian's job status at the elderly welfare facilities [master's thesis]. Daejin University; 2007.
26. Park HH, Lee KW, Kim SO. A study on the participation motivation of clinical nurses in job training. J Digit Converg 2016; 14(8): 319-329.
27. Kwak YS, Han MJ. Study of the job satisfaction and characteristics of dietitians working in the elderly health care facility. J Korean Soc Food Cult 2012; 27(6): 677-685.
28. Bae HJ, Lee HY, Chun HJ. An assessment of dietitian job tasks according to the characteristics of foodservice operations and dietitians. Korean J Food Cookery Sci 2007; 23(6): 858-866.
29. Manning CK, Vickery CE. Disengagement and work constraints are deterrents to participation in continuing professional education among registered dietitians. J Am Diet Assoc 2000; 100(12): 1540-1542.

Table 1

Demographic characteristics N=144

Table 2

Work status on elderly welfare facility for elderly N=144

1) Multiple responses, 2) Mean ± SD

Table 3

Reasons of Education participation factor analysis N=144

KMO=0.953, Cronbach's α=0.975

Bartlett's test of sphericity χ²=4500.437, df=378, (p<0.001)

Total accumulation variance explanation=74.658%

1. strongly disagree 4. neither agree nor disagree 7. strongly agree

Table 4

Deterrents of education participant factor analysis N=144

KMO=0.900, Cronbach's α=0.951

Bartlett's test of sphericity χ²=9673.157, df=378, (p<0.001)

Total accumulation variance explanation=72.022%

1. strongly disagree 4. neither agree nor disagree 7. strongly agree

Table 5

Effect of dispositional barrier on participant reasons

R²=0.123, F=6.370^***

^*: p<0.05 ^**: p<0.01 ^***: p<0.001

Table 6

Effect of dissatisfaction of education usability on participant reasons

R²=0.008, F=0.360

Table 7

Effect of institutional barrier on participant reasons

R²=0.042, F=1.993

^*: p<0.05

Table 8

Effect of situational barrier on participant reasons

R²=0.068, F=3.290^*

^*: p<0.05, ^**: p<0.01

Figure & Data

REFERENCES

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

PubReader

Cite

CITE: export Copy Download Format; Close

Download Citation

Download a citation file in RIS format that can be imported by all major citation management software, including EndNote, ProCite, RefWorks, and Reference Manager.

Format:

RIS — For EndNote, ProCite, RefWorks, and most other reference management software
BibTeX — For JabRef, BibDesk, and other BibTeX-specific software

Include:

Citation for the content below
Citation and abstract for the content below

Analysis of the Participation Reasons and Deterrents on Welfare Facility Dietitians for the Elderly

Korean J Community Nutr. 2019;24(2):127-136. Published online April 30, 2019

DOI: https://doi.org/10.5720/kjcn.2019.24.2.127

XML Download

We recommend

Analysis of the Participation Reasons and Deterrents on Welfare Facility Dietitians for the Elderly

Table 1

Demographic characteristics N=144

Table 2

Work status on elderly welfare facility for elderly N=144

1) Multiple responses, 2) Mean ± SD

Table 3

Reasons of Education participation factor analysis N=144

KMO=0.953, Cronbach's α=0.975

Bartlett's test of sphericity χ²=4500.437, df=378, (p<0.001)

Total accumulation variance explanation=74.658%

1. strongly disagree 4. neither agree nor disagree 7. strongly agree

Table 4

Deterrents of education participant factor analysis N=144

KMO=0.900, Cronbach's α=0.951

Bartlett's test of sphericity χ²=9673.157, df=378, (p<0.001)

Total accumulation variance explanation=72.022%

1. strongly disagree 4. neither agree nor disagree 7. strongly agree

Table 5

Effect of dispositional barrier on participant reasons

R²=0.123, F=6.370^***

^*: p<0.05 ^**: p<0.01 ^***: p<0.001

Table 6

Effect of dissatisfaction of education usability on participant reasons

R²=0.008, F=0.360

Table 7

Effect of institutional barrier on participant reasons

R²=0.042, F=1.993

^*: p<0.05

Table 8

Effect of situational barrier on participant reasons

R²=0.068, F=3.290^*

^*: p<0.05, ^**: p<0.01

Table 1 Demographic characteristics N=144

Table 2 Work status on elderly welfare facility for elderly N=144

1) Multiple responses, 2) Mean ± SD

Table 3 Reasons of Education participation factor analysis N=144

KMO=0.953, Cronbach's α=0.975

Bartlett's test of sphericity χ²=4500.437, df=378, (p<0.001)

Total accumulation variance explanation=74.658%

1. strongly disagree 4. neither agree nor disagree 7. strongly agree

Table 4 Deterrents of education participant factor analysis N=144

KMO=0.900, Cronbach's α=0.951

Bartlett's test of sphericity χ²=9673.157, df=378, (p<0.001)

Total accumulation variance explanation=72.022%

1. strongly disagree 4. neither agree nor disagree 7. strongly agree

Table 5 Effect of dispositional barrier on participant reasons

R²=0.123, F=6.370^***

^*: p<0.05 ^**: p<0.01 ^***: p<0.001

Table 6 Effect of dissatisfaction of education usability on participant reasons

R²=0.008, F=0.360

Table 7 Effect of institutional barrier on participant reasons

R²=0.042, F=1.993

^*: p<0.05

Table 8 Effect of situational barrier on participant reasons

R²=0.068, F=3.290^*

^*: p<0.05, ^**: p<0.01