Introduction
The Health and Wellness Survey assessed for health-related quality of life (Healthy Days Measure) using the Centers for Disease Control Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) instrument; and assessed the social/economic and psychological/spiritual subscales of the Ferrans and Powers Quality of Life Index. This study as part of the Health and Wellness Survey gathered data from 232 students.
Key Findings / Highlights:
Students were asked to indicate the number of days the past month in which they did not experience good physical or mental health. They were also asked the number of days in the past month in which poor physical and mental health prevented them from doing usual activities like school work, self-care, and recreation. The average number of healthy days lost determined from the BRFSS instrument is shown below:
- Physical health was not good: 3.29 days
- Mental health was not good: 4.62 days
- Unable to do unusual activities due to poor mental of physical health: 2.31 days
A majority of students generally report having a good quality of life as assessed by the Ferrans and Powers Quality of Life Index (2006). The percentage of students reporting moderate to high satisfaction quality of life in the following quality of life items:
- Your education 77.4%
- Your life in general 75.2%
- Your friends: 75.1%
- Your personal health 68.8%
- Your emotional support from others besides family: 67.4%
- Your personal goal achievement 66.7%
- Your peace of mind: 66.0%
- Your happiness in general: 65.5%
- Faith in God or a higher power: 64.9%
- Your health care 63.2%
- Your residence (home, apartment, residence hall) 62.8%
- Your university campus environment 60.2%
- Your financial needs being met 50.1%
Students were also asked to rate the level of importance of these quality of life items. The percentage of students rating moderate to high importance are:
Life in general: 95.4%
Happiness in general: 94.9%
Peace of mind: 94.7%
Achieving personal goals: 93.9%
Your education: 92.1%
Taking care of financial needs: 91.4%
Health: 89.7%
Friends: 89.7%
Health care: 85.2%
Emotional support from those other than family 84%
University environment: 63.1%
Faith in God or a higher power: 59.6%
When comparing freshmen to upperclassmen responses
Key Recommendations:
Developing a set of quality of life tools for use with long-term strategic planning could be one of several useful means of measuring programming impact across campus departments. For example, quality of life indices for social, mental and physical health could be included in the Residence Life Quality of Life survey to assist program planners in Residence Life and Campus Health target special student needs.
Budget Implication:
Tracking long-term measures of success across specific EMSA goals will require additional assessment resources.
Reference
- Ferrans, C.E. (2006). Ferrans and Powers Quality of Life Index. Retrieved on January 15, 2006 from http://www.uic.edu/orgs/qli/