The design of a real-time formative evaluation of the implementation process of lifestyle interventions at two worksites using a 7-step strategy (BRAVO@Work)

BMC Public Health

Willem van Mechelen¹  Vincent H Hildebrandt²  Pepijn van Empelen²  Luuk H Engbers²  Debbie Wierenga² 

[1] Department of Public and Occupational Health, EMGO + Institute for Health and Care Research, VU University Medical Centre, Amsterdam, The Netherlands;Netherlands Organisation for Applied Scientific Research, TNO Expertise Centre Life Style, P.O. Box 2215, Leiden, 2301 CE, The Netherlands

关键词: Data triangulation;    Embedded scientist;    Worksite health promotion;    Qualitative study;    Formative evaluation;    Process evaluation;    Implementation strategy;   

Others  :  1163348
DOI  :  10.1186/1471-2458-12-619

 received in 2012-06-22, accepted in 2012-07-17,  发布年份 2012

【 摘 要 】

Background

Worksite health promotion programs (WHPPs) offer an attractive opportunity to improve the lifestyle of employees. Nevertheless, broad scale and successful implementation of WHPPs in daily practice often fails. In the present study, called BRAVO@Work, a 7-step implementation strategy was used to develop, implement and embed a WHPP in two different worksites with a focus on multiple lifestyle interventions.

This article describes the design and framework for the formative evaluation of this 7-step strategy under real-time conditions by an embedded scientist with the purpose to gain insight into whether this this 7-step strategy is a useful and effective implementation strategy. Furthermore, we aim to gain insight into factors that either facilitate or hamper the implementation process, the quality of the implemented lifestyle interventions and the degree of adoption, implementation and continuation of these interventions.

Methods and design

This study is a formative evaluation within two different worksites with an embedded scientist on site to continuously monitor the implementation process. Each worksite (i.e. a University of Applied Sciences and an Academic Hospital) will assign a participating faculty or a department, to implement a WHPP focusing on lifestyle interventions using the 7-step strategy. The primary focus will be to describe the natural course of development, implementation and maintenance of a WHPP by studying [a] the use and adherence to the 7-step strategy, [b] barriers and facilitators that influence the natural course of adoption, implementation and maintenance, and [c] the implementation process of the lifestyle interventions. All data will be collected using qualitative (i.e. real-time monitoring and semi-structured interviews) and quantitative methods (i.e. process evaluation questionnaires) applying data triangulation. Except for the real-time monitoring, the data collection will take place at baseline and after 6, 12 and 18 months.

Discussion

This is one of the few studies to extensively and continuously monitor the natural course of the implementation process of a WHPP by a formative evaluation using a mix of quantitative and qualitative methods on different organizational levels (i.e. management, project group, employees) with an embedded scientist on site.

Trial Registration

NTR2861

【 授权许可】

   
2012 Wierenga et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

Figure 2.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Gommer AM, Poos MJJC: Welke ziekten hebben de hoogste prevalentie? In Volksgezondheid toekomstverkenning. Bilthoven: RIVM; 2010.
• [2]Pronk NP, Martinson B, Kessler RC, Beck AL, Simon GE, Wang P: The association between work performance and physical activity, cardiorespiratory fitness, and obesity. J Occup Environ Med 2004, 46(1):19-25.
• [3]van Duijvenbode DC, Hoozemans MJ, van Poppel MN, Proper KI: The relationship between overweight and obesity, and sick leave: a systematic review. Int J Obes (Lond) 2009, 33(8):807-816.
• [4]Proper KI, Hildebrandt VH: Overweight and obesity among Dutch workers: differences between occupational groups and sectors. Int Arch Occup Environ Health 2010, 83(1):61-68.
• [5]Jans MP, van den Heuvel SG, Hildebrandt VH, Bongers PM: Overweight and Obesity as Predictors of Absenteeism in the Working Population of the Netherlands. JOEM 2007, 49(9):975-980.
• [6]Kirsten W: Making the link between health and productivity at the workplace–a global perspective. Ind Health 2010, 48(3):251-255.
• [7]Mills PR, Kessler RC, Cooper J, Sullivan S: Impact of a health promotion program on employee health risks and work productivity. Am J Health Promot 2007, 22(1):45-53.
• [8]World Health Organization: Workplace health promotion. The workplace: a priority setting for health promotion. 2011. http://www.who.int/occupational_health/topics/workplace/en/index.html webcite
• [9]Engbers LE, van Poppel MN, Chin A, Paw MJ, van Mechelen W: Worksite health promotion programs with environmental changes: a systematic review. Am J Prev Med 2005, 29(1):61-70.
• [10]Kremers S, Reubsaet A, Martens M, Gerards S, Jonkers R, Candel M, de Weerdt I, de Vries N: Systematic prevention of overweight and obesity in adults: a qualitative and quantitative literature analysis. Obes Rev 2010, 11(5):371-379.
• [11]Ni Mhurchu C, Aston LM, Jebb SA: Effects of worksite health promotion interventions on employee diets: a systematic review. BMC Public Health 2010, 10(10):62.
• [12]Jepson RG, Harris FM, Platt S, Tannahill C: The effectiveness of interventions to change six health behaviors: a review of reviews. BMC Public Health 2010, 8(10):538.
• [13]Grol R, Wensing M: What drives change? Barriers to and incentives for achieving evidence-based practice. Med J Aust 2004, 180(6 Suppl):S57-S60.
• [14]Grol R, Grimshaw J: From best evidence to best practice: effective implementation of change in patients' care. Lancet 2003, 362(9391):1225-1230.
• [15]Grol R: Implementing guidelines in general practice care. Qual Health Care 1992, 1(3):184-191.
• [16]Durlak JA, DuPre EP: Implementation matters: A review of research on the influence of implementation on program outcomes and the factors affecting implementation. Am J Community Psychol 2008, 41:327-350.
• [17]Grimshaw J, Eccles M, Tetroe J: Implementing Clinical Guideline: Current Evidence and Future Implication. J Contin Educ Health Prof 2004, 24:S31-S37.
• [18]Stetler CB, Legro MW, Wallace CM, Bowman C, Guihan M, Hagedorn H, Kimmel B, Sharp N, Smith JL: The role of formative evaluation in implementation research and the QUERI experience. J Gen Intern Med 2006, 21 Suppl 2:S1-S8.
• [19]Mittman BS: Creating the evidence base for quality improvement collaboratives. Ann Int Med 2004, 140(11):897-901.
• [20]Patton MQ: Evaluation of program implementation. Eval Stu Rev Annu 1979, 4:318-345.
• [21]Leykum LK, Pugh JA, Lanham HJ, Harmon J, McDaniel RRJ: Implementation research design: integrating participatory action research into randomized controlled trials. Implement Sci 2009, 4:69. BioMed Central Full Text
• [22]Wandersman A, Duffy J, Flaspohler P, Noonan R, Lubell KS, Stillman L, Blachman M, Dunville R, Saul J: Bridging the gap between prevention research and practice: the interactive systems framework for dissemination and implementation. Am J Community Psychol 2008, 41:171-181.
• [23]Rogers EM: Diffusion of innovations. New York: Free Press; 2003.
• [24]Paulussen TH, Wiefferink K, Mesters I: Invoering van effectief gebleken interventies. In Gezondheidsvoorlichting en gedragsverandering. Edited by Brug J, Asseman P, Lechner L. Assen: van Gorcum; 2007.
• [25]Fleuren M, Wiefferink K, Paulussen T: Determinants of innovation within health care organizations: literature review and Delphi study. Int J Qual Health Care 2004, 16(2):107-123.
• [26]Wynne R: European foundation for the improvement of living and working conditions: Workplace health promotion in Europe. Research summary. Luxembourg: Office for official publications of the European Communities; 1997.
• [27]Wynne R, Clarkin N: Under construction: building for health in the EC workplace. Luxembourg: Officer for Offical Publication of the European Communities; 1992.
• [28]Koenders P: BRAVO: a healthy lifestyle. Fortis puts health management on the agenda (BRAVO: een gezonde leefstijl. Fortis zet gezondheidsmanagement op de kaart). Arbo 2008, 6:16-19.
• [29]Glasgow RE, Vogt TM, Boles SM: Evaluating the public health impact of health promotion interventions: the RE-AIM framework. Am J Public Health 1999, 89:9-1322.
• [30]Dzewaltowski DA, Estabrooks PA, Glasgow RE: The future of physical activity behavior change research: what is needed to improve translation of research into health promotion practice? Exerc Sport Sci Rev 2004, 32(2):57-63.
• [31]Dzewaltowski DA, Glasgow RE, Klesges LM, Estabrooks PA, Brock E: RE-AIM: evidence-based standards and a web resource to improve translation of research into practice. Ann Behav Med 2004, 28(2):75-80.
• [32]Steckler A, Linnan L: Proces Evaluation for Public Health Interventions and Research. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass; 2002.
• [33]Mays N, Pope C: Rigour and qualitative research. BMJ 1995, 311(6997):109-112.
• [34]Mays N, Pope C: Assessing quality in qualitative research. BMJ. 2000, 320:50-52.
• [35]Boeije H: Analyze in qualitative research. (Analyseren in kwalitatief onderzoek. denken en doen). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Boom onderwijs; 2009.
• [36]Wester F, Peters V: Qualitative analyse. Principles and procedures (Kwalitatieve analyse. Uitgangspunten en procedures). Bussem, The Netherlands: Coutinho bv; 2004.
• [37]Steckler A, Ethelbah B, Martin CJ, Stewart D, Pardilla M, Gittelsohn J, Stone E, Fenn D, Smyth M, Vu M: Pathways process evaluation results: a school-based prevention trial to promote healthful diet and physical activity in American Indian third, fourth, and fifth grade students. Prev med 2003, 37:S80-S90.
• [38]Baranowski T, Stables G: Process evaluations of the 5-a-day projects. Health Educ Behav 2000, 27(2):157-166.
• [39]Pratt CC, McGuidan WM, Katzev AR: Measuring program outcomes: Using retrospective pretest methodology. Amer J Evaluation 2000, 21(3):341-349.
• [40]Johnson CC, Lai YL, Rice J, Rose D, Webber LS: ACTION live: using process evaluation to describe implementation of a worksite wellness program. J Occup Environ Med 2010, 52(Suppl 1):S14-S21.
• [41]Glasgow RE, McCaul KD, Fisher KJ: Participation in worksite health promotion: a critique of the literature and recommendations for future practice. Health Educ Q 1993, 20(3):391-408.
• [42]Bouffard JA, Taxman FS, Silvermand R: Improving process evaluations of correctional programs by using a comprehensive evaluation methodology. Eval Programm Plann 2003, 26:149-161.
• [43]Bull SS, Gillette C, Glasgow RE, Estabrooks PA: Work site health promotion research: to what extent can we generalize the results and what is needed to translate research into practice? Am J Public Health 2003, 30:537-549.
• [44]Craig P, Dieppe P, Macintyre S, Nazareth I, Petticrew M: Developing and evaluating complex interventions: the ned Medical Research Council guidance. BMJ 2008, 337(1655):979-983.
• [45]Campbell NC, Murray E, Darbyshire J, Emery J, Farmer A, Griffiths F, Guthrie B, Lester H, Wilson P, Kinmonth AL: Designing and evaluating complex interventions to improve health care. BMJ 2007, 334(7591):455-459.