Brahim Lydia Ould, Lambert Sylvie D, Feeley Nancy, McCusker Jane, Bilsker Dan, Yaffe Mark J, Antonacci Rosetta, Robins Stephanie, Kayser John William, Genest Christine, Paraskevopoulos Haida, Blair Jessica, Laizner Andrea
Ingram School of Nursing, McGill University, 680 Rue Sherbrooke O #1800, Montréal, QC, H3A 2M7, Canada.
St. Mary's Research Centre, Montreal, Canada.
Implement Sci Commun. 2025 May 15;6(1):59. doi: 10.1186/s43058-025-00731-y.
Intervention adaptation, the deliberate modification of the design or delivery of interventions to a new context, is more resource efficient than de novo development. However, adaptation must be approached methodically, as some modifications, such as those to the core components, may compromise the intervention's initial efficacy. While adaptation frameworks have been published, none have been identified as more likely to result in successful adaptations. Further, frameworks lack the step-by-step details needed for operationalization. Therefore, the goal of this paper is to share our experience in addressing these methodological limitations in intervention adaptation. The objectives were to describe: 1) our development of a step-by-step, theoretically and empirically driven approach to intervention adaptation labelled the ConsoLidated AppRoach to Intervention adaptatiON (CLARION), 2) the application of CLARION in adapting a depression self-management intervention, 3) the facilitators and challenges encountered when using CLARION.
The development of CLARION was informed by the Medical Research Council guidance, the Method for Program Adaptation through Community Engagement (M-PACE), and a published scoping review identifying the key steps in existing adaptation frameworks. M-PACE was selected for its patient-oriented research principles, its application to a similar complex intervention, and for offering some of the specificity needed for execution. However, the scoping review indicated that M-PACE lacked three critical steps: selecting a candidate intervention, understanding its core components, and pre-testing the adapted intervention. These were added to form CLARION, which was structured in two stages: the first involves selecting an intervention, identifying core components, and deciding on modifications; the second stage solicits interest stakeholder feedback to assess the acceptability of the preliminary adapted intervention (pre-test).
Once CLARION was developed, it was put into action to adapt a depression self-management intervention. CLARION demonstrated several strengths: 1) clearly articulating core components before deciding on modifications, 2) mobilizing a diverse steering committee of experts, including patient partners and developers of the original intervention, which balanced input and efficiency, and 3) establishing committee decision-making rules prior to adjudication (specific criteria and 75% supermajority). Key challenges included defining the types of modifications requiring committee input, determining the extent of the committee's involvement, and prioritizing the presence of all committee members at meetings to avoid difficulties integrating incongruent feedback.
The development of CLARION contributes to best practices for intervention adaptation by identifying step-by-step guidance as well as facilitators and barriers to its application.
干预措施调整是指针对新环境对干预措施的设计或实施进行有意修改,相较于重新开发,它更具资源利用效率。然而,调整必须有条不紊地进行,因为某些修改,比如对核心组成部分的修改,可能会损害干预措施最初的效果。虽然已有干预措施调整框架发布,但尚未发现有哪个框架更有可能带来成功的调整。此外,这些框架缺乏实施所需的详细步骤。因此,本文的目的是分享我们在解决干预措施调整中这些方法学局限性方面的经验。目标是描述:1)我们开发的一种逐步的、理论和实证驱动的干预措施调整方法,称为综合干预调整方法(CLARION);2)CLARION在调整一项抑郁症自我管理干预措施中的应用;3)使用CLARION时遇到的促进因素和挑战。
CLARION的开发参考了医学研究理事会的指南、通过社区参与进行项目调整的方法(M-PACE)以及一项已发表的范围综述,该综述确定了现有调整框架中的关键步骤。选择M-PACE是因为其以患者为导向的研究原则、在类似复杂干预措施中的应用以及提供了一些执行所需的具体内容。然而,范围综述表明M-PACE缺少三个关键步骤:选择候选干预措施、理解其核心组成部分以及对调整后的干预措施进行预测试。将这些步骤添加进去形成了CLARION,它分为两个阶段:第一阶段包括选择干预措施、确定核心组成部分并决定修改内容;第二阶段征求利益相关者的反馈意见,以评估初步调整后的干预措施(预测试)的可接受性。
CLARION开发完成后,被用于调整一项抑郁症自我管理干预措施。CLARION展现出几个优点:1)在决定修改之前清晰阐述核心组成部分;2)组建了一个多元化的指导委员会,成员包括患者代表和原始干预措施的开发者使得投入与效率达到平衡;3)在裁决之前制定委员会决策规则(具体标准和75%的绝对多数)。主要挑战包括确定需要委员会参与的修改类型、确定委员会的参与程度以及优先确保所有委员会成员出席会议,以避免整合不一致反馈时出现困难。
CLARION的开发通过确定逐步指导以及其应用的促进因素和障碍,为干预措施调整的最佳实践做出了贡献。