Division of Public Health Sciences and Alvin J, Siteman Cancer Center, Washington University School of Medicine, St, Louis, MO, USA.
Implement Sci. 2012 Jul 16;7:65. doi: 10.1186/1748-5908-7-65.
There is a great deal of variation in the existing capacity of primary prevention programs and policies addressing chronic disease to deliver evidence-based interventions (EBIs). In order to develop and evaluate implementation strategies that are tailored to the appropriate level of capacity, there is a need for an easy-to-administer tool to stage organizational readiness for EBIs.
Based on theoretical frameworks, including Rogers' Diffusion of Innovations, we developed a survey instrument to measure four domains representing stages of readiness for EBI: awareness, adoption, implementation, and maintenance. A separate scale representing organizational climate as a potential mediator of readiness for EBIs was also included in the survey. Twenty-three questions comprised the four domains, with four to nine items each, using a seven-point response scale. Representatives from obesity, asthma, diabetes, and tobacco prevention programs serving diverse populations in the United States were surveyed (N=243); test-retest reliability was assessed with 92 respondents.
Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was used to test and refine readiness scales. Test-retest reliability of the readiness scales, as measured by intraclass correlation, ranged from 0.47-0.71. CFA found good fit for the five-item adoption and implementation scales and resulted in revisions of the awareness and maintenance scales. The awareness scale was split into two two-item scales, representing community and agency awareness. The maintenance scale was split into five- and four-item scales, representing infrastructural maintenance and evaluation maintenance, respectively. Internal reliability of scales (Cronbach's α) ranged from 0.66-0.78. The model for the final revised scales approached good fit, with most factor loadings >0.6 and all >0.4.
The lack of adequate measurement tools hinders progress in dissemination and implementation research. These preliminary results help fill this gap by describing the reliability and measurement properties of a theory-based tool; the short, user-friendly instrument may be useful to researchers and practitioners seeking to assess organizational readiness for EBIs across a variety of chronic disease prevention programs and settings.
在现有的针对慢性病的初级预防项目和政策中,提供循证干预措施(EBIs)的能力存在很大差异。为了制定和评估针对适当能力水平的实施策略,需要一种易于管理的工具来评估 EBI 的组织准备情况。
基于理论框架,包括罗杰斯的创新扩散理论,我们开发了一个调查工具,用于衡量代表 EBI 准备情况的四个领域:意识、采用、实施和维持。该调查还包括一个代表 EBI 准备情况的组织氛围的单独量表,作为潜在的中介因素。该调查由 23 个问题组成,涵盖了四个领域,每个领域有 4 到 9 个项目,使用七点响应量表。代表来自肥胖、哮喘、糖尿病和烟草预防计划的人员在美国为不同人群服务(N=243);92 名受访者进行了测试重测信度评估。
使用验证性因子分析(CFA)对准备情况量表进行测试和改进。采用内部一致性系数(ICC)衡量的准备情况量表的重测信度范围为 0.47-0.71。CFA 发现采用和实施量表的五项目和五项目量表具有良好的拟合度,并导致了意识和维持量表的修订。意识量表分为两个两个项目的量表,分别代表社区和机构意识。维持量表分为基础设施维护和评估维护的五项目和四项目量表。量表的内部信度(Cronbach's α)范围为 0.66-0.78。最终修订量表的模型接近良好拟合,大多数因子负荷>0.6,全部>0.4。
缺乏足够的衡量工具阻碍了传播和实施研究的进展。这些初步结果通过描述基于理论的工具的可靠性和测量特性来填补这一空白;简短易用的工具可能对寻求评估各种慢性病预防计划和环境中 EBI 组织准备情况的研究人员和从业者有用。