Assesing healthy lifestyle behaviours of the students in faculties other than health sciences in Çukurova University

Aim: The aim of this study was to assess the health promotion behaviors and affecting sociodemographic features of students in faculties other than health sciences.Material and Method: The sample population was composed of 871 students attending faculties other than the health sciences (environmental engineering, industrial engineering, civil engineering, law school, religious culture and moral knowledge preceptor ship, english preceptor ship, graphic, internal architecture, government conservatory, string instrument, piano, theater departments) of Cukurova University. Data was collected by an anonymous questionnaire and Health Promotion Lifestyle Profile (HPLP)-II scale.Results: Of students, 54,8 % were female. The mean age was 21,30 ± 1,95 (17-32) years. The mean score of Health Promotion Lifestyle Profile-II scale was intermediate (126,29±16,00). The highest score was in ?self-actualization? subscale and the lowest one in ?physical activity? subscale. There was a significant relationship between age groups and ?stress management? subscale scores (p=0,021). Males had higher scores in ?stress management? subscale but it was not significant (p>0,05). Females had higher scores in all other subscales but only ?interpersonal support? and ?nutrition? subscale scores were significant (p=0,009, p=0,002, respectively). HPLP-II scores were not significantly related to students? family income and lost years (p>0,05). There was no significant relationship between HPLP-II scores and living with family, parental education status, family income, number of people living together, and rank of student in siblings (p>0,05). Students with chronic conditions had higher scores in ?physical activity? and HPLP-II scores and students with family members having chronic conditions had higher ?self-actualization? scores (p=0,004, p=0,048, p=0,005, respectively).There was no significant relationship between students? perception of health, recent routine dental examination, alcohol use, body mass index (BMI) and HPLP-II scores (p>0,05). There was a significant relationship between students? recent routine health examination and ?self-actualization? subscale and smoke use and ?nutrition? subscale scores (p=0,002, p=0,001, respectively). Students who had been affected by their mothers? attitude to form lifestyle behaviors had higher ?interpersonal support? scores (p=0,042). Students who had been affected by their friends? attitude to form lifestyle behaviors had higher ?nutrition? scores (p=0,034). No significant relationship was found between being affected by father or sibling and the number of affecting people and HPLP-II scores (p>0,05).Conclusion: Our findings may lead to establish periodic training programs for prevention and health promotion in university students who are separated from their families and usual environments. Future strategies should be aimed at providing supportive environment to facilitate individual behavior change in order to achieve a greater impact in health promotion. Management should support individualized interventions by implementing or modifying some workplace policies which promote and sustain healthy lifestyle behaviors.Key words: Health promotion, HPLP-II, university students.