A promoção da saúde no núcleo de apoio à saúde da família: o papel do profissional de educação física

• Ano de defesa: 2015
• Autor(a) principal: Gisele Marcolino Saporetti
• Tipo de documento: Dissertação
• Tipo de acesso: Acesso aberto
• Idioma: por
• Instituição de defesa: Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais; UFMG
• Palavras-chave em Português: Promoção da Saúde; Educação Física; Pessoal de Saúde; Atenção Primária à Saúde; Educação física e treinamento; Atenção primária à saúde; Saúde da família; Medicina; Promoção da saúde; Pessoal de saúde
• Link de acesso: http://hdl.handle.net/1843/BUBD-9ZCNU9

The Centers of Support for Family Health (CSFH) are characterized today as a locus of insertion of Physical Education Professional (PEP) in Primary Health Care (PHC). This fact has brought challenges to Physical Education Professionals practice regarding the implementation of health promotion actions at both individual and collective extents. The aim of this study was to analyze health promotion actions carried out by Physical Education professionals in Centers of Support for Family Health. The specific objectives were (1) to analyze documents produced by the Federal Council of Physical Education since 1998, regarding the definition and regulation of the Physical Education Professionals activities, with an emphasis on Primary Health Care; (2) to identify health promotion actions performed by Physical Education professionals within their CSFHs; and (3) to identify the variables which facilitated and those which hindered the actions of health promotion conducted by Physical Education professionals inserted in the Support Center for Family Health. It is a qualitative, exploratory research, in which documental research and focus groups with key informants have been used as instruments of data collection. The result of the document analysis revealed the concern of the Federal Council of Physical Education in contemplating and looking after new performance prospects for the profession in order to contribute to the professional guidelines. The result of the analysis of the focus groups showed that the understanding of PEP on the concept of PHC is in line with the recommendations by the National Policy for the Promotion of Health and the World Health Organization. It was also shown that PHC action implementations by PEP were comprehensive, diversified and in line with staff and community. Factors such as the reorientation of healthcare model, community participation, appreciation of multidisciplinary and intersectoral work and government sponsorship for physical activity practice were identified as facilitators to the implementation of PHC actions. Among the difficulties, the group highlighted the lack of infrastructure, lack of training, not understanding by other professionals of the paradigm shift from curative care to the PHCs and their conception, still focused on the individual clinical actions rather than collective PHC.