Suppr超能文献

国家卫生服务数字糖尿病预防计划行为改变技术内容和基础理论的方案规范保真度:文件分析。

Fidelity to Program Specification of the National Health Service Digital Diabetes Prevention Program Behavior Change Technique Content and Underpinning Theory: Document Analysis.

机构信息

Manchester Centre for Health Psychology, Division of Psychology and Mental Health, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom.

出版信息

J Med Internet Res. 2022 Apr 27;24(4):e34253. doi: 10.2196/34253.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

The National Health Service (NHS) Diabetes Prevention Program is a behavior change intervention for adults in England who are identified as being at high risk of developing type 2 diabetes. The face-to-face service was launched in 2016, followed by a digital service (NHS Digital Diabetes Prevention Program [NHS-DDPP]) in 2019. A total of 4 service providers were commissioned to deliver the NHS-DDPP and were required to deliver the digital service in line with a program specification detailing the key intervention content. The fidelity of the behavior change content in the digital service (ie, the extent to which the program is delivered as intended) is currently unknown. Digital interventions may allow higher fidelity as staff do not have to be trained to deliver all intervention content. Assessing fidelity of the intervention design is particularly important to establish the planned behavior change content in the NHS-DDPP and the extent to which this adheres to the program specification. This is the first known independent assessment of design fidelity in a large-scale digital behavior change intervention.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to assess the fidelity of the behavior change content in each of the 4 NHS-DDPP providers' intervention designs to the full program specification.

METHODS

We conducted a document review of each provider's NHS-DDPP intervention design, along with interviews with program developers employed by the 4 digital providers (n=6). Providers' intervention design documents and interview transcripts were coded for behavior change techniques (BCTs; ie, the active ingredients of the intervention) using the Behavior Change Technique Taxonomy version 1 and underpinning theory using the Theory Coding Scheme framework. The BCTs identified in each digital provider's intervention design were compared with the 19 BCTs included in the program specification.

RESULTS

Of the 19 BCTs specified in the program specification, the 4 providers planned to deliver 16 (84%), 17 (89%), 16 (84%), and 16 (84%) BCTs, respectively. An additional 41 unspecified BCTs were included in at least one of the 4 digital providers' intervention designs. By contrast, inconsistent use of the underpinning theory was apparent across providers, and none of the providers had produced a logic model to explain how their programs were expected to work. All providers linked some of their planned BCTs to theoretical constructs; however, justification for the inclusion of other BCTs was not described.

CONCLUSIONS

The fidelity of BCT content in the NHS-DDPP was higher than that previously documented for the face-to-face service. Thus, if service users engage with the NHS-DDPP, this should increase the effectiveness of the program. However, given that a clear theoretical underpinning supports the translation of BCTs in intervention designs to intervention delivery, the absence of a logic model describing the constructs to be targeted by specific BCTs is potentially problematic.

摘要

背景

国民保健制度(NHS)糖尿病预防计划是一项针对英格兰高危 2 型糖尿病患者的行为改变干预措施。面对面服务于 2016 年推出,随后于 2019 年推出了数字服务(NHS 数字糖尿病预防计划[ NHS-DDPP])。共有 4 家服务提供商被委托提供 NHS-DDPP,并要求按照详细说明关键干预内容的计划规范提供数字服务。数字服务中的行为改变内容的保真度(即计划的实施程度)目前尚不清楚。数字干预措施可能允许更高的保真度,因为工作人员不必接受培训来提供所有干预内容。评估干预设计的保真度对于确定 NHS-DDPP 中的计划行为改变内容以及该内容与计划规范的符合程度非常重要。这是对大型数字行为改变干预措施进行的首次已知的独立设计保真度评估。

目的

本研究旨在评估 NHS-DDPP 中每个 4 个提供者的干预设计的行为改变内容与完整计划规范的一致性。

方法

我们对每个提供者的 NHS-DDPP 干预设计进行了文件审查,并对 4 个数字提供者的项目开发人员进行了访谈(n=6)。使用行为改变技术分类学版本 1 和理论编码方案框架对提供者的干预设计文件和访谈记录进行编码,以确定行为改变技术(BCT;即干预的有效成分)。比较每个数字提供商的干预设计中确定的 BCT 与计划规范中包含的 19 个 BCT。

结果

在计划规范中指定的 19 个 BCT 中,4 个提供者分别计划提供 16(84%),17(89%),16(84%)和 16(84%)个 BCT。至少有一个数字提供者的干预设计中包含了另外 41 个未指定的 BCT。相比之下,各提供者在使用基础理论方面存在不一致性,并且没有一个提供者制作了逻辑模型来解释其计划如何发挥作用。所有提供者都将某些计划的 BCT 与理论结构联系起来;但是,没有描述包含其他 BCT 的依据。

结论

NHS-DDPP 中的 BCT 内容保真度高于之前针对面对面服务记录的内容。因此,如果服务用户使用 NHS-DDPP,这应该会提高该计划的有效性。但是,鉴于明确的理论基础支持将 BCT 从干预设计转化为干预交付,缺乏描述特定 BCT 要针对的结构的逻辑模型可能会产生问题。

相似文献

引用本文的文献

本文引用的文献

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验