Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
School of Psychology, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
Implement Sci. 2018 Feb 17;13(1):32. doi: 10.1186/s13012-017-0704-7.
Interpreting evaluations of complex interventions can be difficult without sufficient description of key intervention content. We aimed to develop an implementation package for primary care which could be delivered using typically available resources and could be adapted to target determinants of behaviour for each of four quality indicators: diabetes control, blood pressure control, anticoagulation for atrial fibrillation and risky prescribing. We describe the development and prospective verification of behaviour change techniques (BCTs) embedded within the adaptable implementation packages.
We used an over-lapping multi-staged process. We identified evidence-based, candidate delivery mechanisms-mainly audit and feedback, educational outreach and computerised prompts and reminders. We drew upon interviews with primary care professionals using the Theoretical Domains Framework to explore likely determinants of adherence to quality indicators. We linked determinants to candidate BCTs. With input from stakeholder panels, we prioritised likely determinants and intervention content prior to piloting the implementation packages. Our content analysis assessed the extent to which embedded BCTs could be identified within the packages and compared them across the delivery mechanisms and four quality indicators.
Each implementation package included at least 27 out of 30 potentially applicable BCTs representing 15 of 16 BCT categories. Whilst 23 BCTs were shared across all four implementation packages (e.g. BCTs relating to feedback and comparing behaviour), some BCTs were unique to certain delivery mechanisms (e.g. 'graded tasks' and 'problem solving' for educational outreach). BCTs addressing the determinants 'environmental context' and 'social and professional roles' (e.g. 'restructuring the social and 'physical environment' and 'adding objects to the environment') were indicator specific. We found it challenging to operationalise BCTs targeting 'environmental context', 'social influences' and 'social and professional roles' within our chosen delivery mechanisms.
We have demonstrated a transparent process for selecting, operationalising and verifying the BCT content in implementation packages adapted to target four quality indicators in primary care. There was considerable overlap in BCTs identified across the four indicators suggesting core BCTs can be embedded and verified within delivery mechanisms commonly available to primary care. Whilst feedback reports can include a wide range of BCTs, computerised prompts can deliver BCTs at the time of decision making, and educational outreach can allow for flexibility and individual tailoring in delivery.
如果没有对关键干预内容进行充分描述,解释复杂干预措施的效果可能会很困难。我们旨在为初级保健开发一个实施包,该实施包可以使用通常可用的资源来提供,并可以针对四个质量指标中的每一个的行为决定因素进行调整:糖尿病控制、血压控制、心房颤动的抗凝治疗和危险处方。我们描述了可适应实施包中嵌入的行为改变技术(BCT)的开发和前瞻性验证。
我们使用重叠的多阶段过程。我们确定了基于证据的候选传递机制,主要是审核和反馈、教育推广以及计算机提示和提醒。我们利用初级保健专业人员的访谈,使用理论领域框架来探讨对质量指标的依从性的可能决定因素。我们将决定因素与候选 BCT 联系起来。在利益相关者小组的参与下,我们在试点实施包之前,对可能的决定因素和干预内容进行了优先级排序。我们的内容分析评估了在包中可以识别出的嵌入 BCT 的程度,并对四个质量指标和四种传递机制进行了比较。
每个实施包都包含至少 30 个潜在适用 BCT 中的 27 个,代表 16 个 BCT 类别中的 15 个。虽然所有四个实施包都共享 23 个 BCT(例如,与反馈和比较行为相关的 BCT),但有些 BCT 是特定于某些传递机制的(例如,教育推广中的“分级任务”和“解决问题”)。针对“环境背景”和“社会和职业角色”的 BCT(例如,“重构社会和物理环境”和“向环境中添加对象”)是指标特定的。我们发现,在我们选择的传递机制中,将 BCT 应用于“环境背景”、“社会影响”和“社会和职业角色”的决定因素具有挑战性。
我们已经证明了一种透明的过程,用于选择、操作和验证针对初级保健中的四个质量指标进行调整的实施包中的 BCT 内容。在四个指标中识别出的 BCT 有很大的重叠,这表明核心 BCT 可以嵌入并在初级保健中常用的传递机制中得到验证。虽然反馈报告可以包含广泛的 BCT,但计算机提示可以在决策时提供 BCT,而教育推广可以提供灵活性和个性化的交付。