Specifying content and mechanisms of change in interventions to change professionals’ practice: an illustration from the Good Goals study in occupational therapy

Implementation Science

Jill J Francis¹  Niina Kolehmainen¹ 

[1] Aberdeen Health Psychology Group, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK

关键词: Occupational therapy;    Goal setting;    Professionals’ practice;    Behaviour change;    Developing interventions;    Complex interventions;   

Others  :  813892
DOI  :  10.1186/1748-5908-7-100

 received in 2012-02-02, accepted in 2012-10-05,  发布年份 2012

【 摘 要 】

Background

It is widely agreed that interventions to change professionals’ practice need to be clearly specified. This involves (1) selecting and defining the intervention techniques, (2) operationalising the techniques and deciding their delivery, and (3) formulating hypotheses about the mechanisms through which the techniques are thought to result in change. Descriptions of methods to achieve these objectives are limited. This paper reports methods and illustrates outputs from a study to meet these objectives, specifically from the Good Goals study to improve occupational therapists’ caseload management practice.

Methods

(1) Behaviour change techniques were identified and selected from an existing matrix that maps techniques to determinants. An existing coding manual was used to define the techniques. (2) A team of occupational therapists generated context-relevant, acceptable modes of delivery for the techniques; these data were compared and contrasted with previously collected data, literature on caseload management, and the aims of the intervention. (3) Hypotheses about the mechanisms of change were formulated by drawing on the matrix and on theories of behaviour change.

Results

(1) Eight behaviour change techniques were selected: goal specified; self-monitoring; contract; graded tasks; increasing skills (problem solving, decision making, goal setting); coping skills; rehearsal of relevant skills; social processes of encouragement, support, and pressure; demonstration by others; and feedback. (2) A range of modes of delivery were generated (e.g., graded tasks’ consisting of series of clinical cases and situations that become increasingly difficult). Conditions for acceptable delivery were identified (e.g., ‘self-monitoring’ was acceptable only if delivered at team level). The modes of delivery were specified as face-to-face training, task sheets, group tasks, DVDs, and team-based weekly meetings. (3) The eight techniques were hypothesized to target caseload management practice through eleven mediating variables. Three domains were hypothesized to be most likely to change: beliefs about capabilities, motivation and goals, and behavioural regulation.

Conclusions

The project provides an exemplar of a systematic and reportable development of a quality-improvement intervention, with its methods likely to be applicable to other projects. A subsequent study of the intervention has provided early indication that use of systematic methods to specify interventions may help to maximize acceptability and effectiveness.

【 授权许可】

   
2012 Kolehmainen and Francis; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Medical Research Council: A framework for development and evaluation of RCTs for complex interventions to improve health. Medical Research Council, London; 2000.
• [2]Craig P, Dieppe P, Macinture S, Michie S, Nazareth I, Petticrew M, For the Medical Research Council: Developing and evaluating complex interventions: new guidance. Medical Research Council, London; 2008.
• [3]Workgroup for Intervention Development and Evaluation Research (WIDER): WIDER Recommendations to improve reporting of the content of behaviour change interventions. http://interventiondesign.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/wider-recommendations.pdf
• [4]Eldridge S, Spencer A, Cryer C, Parsons S, Underwood M, Feder G: Why modelling a complex intervention is an important precursor to trial design: lessons from studying an intervention to reduce falls-related injuries in older people. J Health Serv Res Policy 2005, 10:133-142.
• [5]Davidson KW, Goldstein M, Kaplan RM, Kaufmann PG, Knatterud GL, Orleans CT, Spring B, Trudeau KJ, Whitlock EP: Evidence-based behavioural medicine: what is it and how do we achieve it? Ann Behav Med 2003, 26:161-171.
• [6]Campbell NC, Murray E, Darbyshire J, Emery J, Farmer A, Griffiths F, Guthrie B, Lester H, Wilson P, Kinmonth AL: Designing and evaluating complex intervention to improve health care. Br Med J 2007, 334:455-459.
• [7]Schulz KF, Altman DG, Moher D, for the CONSORT group: CONSORT 2010 Statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. BMJ 2010, 134:663-702.
• [8]Des Jarlais DC, Lyles C, Crepaz N, the TREND Group: Improving the reporting quality of nonrandomized evaluations of behavioral and public health interventions: the TREND statement. Am J Public Health 2004, 94:361-366.
• [9]Michie S, Fixsen D, Grimshaw JM, Eccles MP: Specifying and reporting complex behaviour change interventions: the need for a scientific method. Implement Sci 2009., 4 BioMed Central Full Text
• [10]Bartholomew LK, Parcel GS, Kok G, Gottlieb NH, Fernandez ME: Planning health promotion programs An Intervention Mapping approach. 3rd edition. Jossey Bass, San Francisco; 2011.
• [11]Foy R, Francis J, Johnston M, Eccles M, Lecouturier J, Bamford C, Grimshaw J: The development of a theory-based intervention to promote appropriate disclosure of a diagnosis of dementia. BMC Health Serv Res 2007, 7:207. BioMed Central Full Text
• [12]Hrisos S, Eccles M, Johnston M, Francis J, Kaner EFS, Steen N, Grimshaw J: Developing the content of two behavioural interventions: using theory-based interventions to promote GP management of upper respiratory tract infection without prescribing antibiotics #1. BMC Health Serv Res 2008, 8:11. BioMed Central Full Text
• [13]Michie S, Johnston M, Francis J, Hardeman W, Eccles M: From theory to intervention: mapping theoretically derived behavioural determinants to behaviour change techniques. Appl Psychol Meas 2008, 57:660-680.
• [14]Feldstein MS: Effects of differences in hospital bed scarcity on type of use. Br Med J 1964, 2:561-565.
• [15]Morgan M, Beech R: Variations in lengths of stay and rates of day case surgery: implications for the efficiency of surgical management. J Epidemiol Community Health 1990, 44:90-105.
• [16]Worthington D: Hospital waiting list management models. J Oper Res Soc 1991, 42:833-843.
• [17]Kolehmainen N: Optimising caseload management: developing an intervention in children’s occupational therapy. PhD Thesis. University of Aberdeen, Health Services Research Unit; 2009.
• [18]Michie S, Johnston M, Abraham C, Lawton R, Parker D, Walker A, on behalf of the “Psychological Theory” Group: Making psychological theory useful for implementing evidence based practice: a consensus approach. Qual Saf Health Care 2005, 14:26-33.
• [19]Hardeman W, Sutton S, Griffin S, Johnston M, White A, Wareham NJ, Kinmonth AL: A causal modelling approach to the development of theory-based behaviour change programmes for trial evaluation. Health Educ Res 2005, 20:676-687.
• [20]Eccles M, Grimshaw J, Walker A, Johnston M, Pitts N: Changing the behaviour of health care professionals: the use of theory in promoting the uptake of research findings. J Clin Epidemiol 2005, 58:107-112.
• [21]Grimshaw JM, Shirran L, Thomas R, Mowatt G, Fraser C, Bero L, Grilli R, Harvey E, Oxman A, O’Brien MA: Changing provider behaviour: an overview of systematic reviews of interventions. Med Care 2001, 39:II2-II45.
• [22]Grimshaw J, Eccles M, Thomas R, MacLennan G, Ramsay G, Fraser C, Vale L: Toward evidence-based quality improvement. J Gen Intern Med 2006, 21:S14-S20.
• [23]Whyte J, Hart T: It’s More than a black box: it’s a Russian doll. Am J Phys Med Rehabil 2003, 82:639-652.
• [24]Abraham C, Michie S: Coding manual to identify behaviour change techniques in behaviour change intervention descriptions. http://interventiondesign.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2008/09/coding-manual-fo.pdf
• [25]Kolehmainen N, Francis J, Duncan EAS, Fraser C: Community professionals management of client care: a mixed-methods systematic review. J Health Serv Res Policy 2010, 15:47-55.
• [26]Bandura A: Self-efficacy: toward a unifying theory of behavioural change. Psychol Review 1977, 84:191-215.
• [27]Carver CS, Scheier MF: Control theory: a useful conceptual framework for personality, social, clinical, and health psychology. Psychol Bull 1982, 92:111-135.
• [28]Gollwitzer PM, Strobe W, Hewstone M (Eds): Goal achievement: the role of intentions In European review of social psychology. Wiley, Chichester, UK; 1993:141-185.
• [29]Radke M, Klisurich D: Experiments in changing food habits. J Am Dietet 1947, 23:403-409.
• [30]Bandura A: Social foundations of thought and action: a social cognitive theory. 1st edition. Prentice-Hall, New Jersey; 1986.
• [31]Carver CS, Scheier MF: On the self-regulation of behaviour. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge; 2001.
• [32]Gollwitzer PM, Oettingen G: The emergence and implementation of health goals. Psychol Health 1998, 13:687-715.
• [33]Gollwitzer PM, Sheeran P: Implementation intentions and goal achievement: a meta-analysis of effects and processes. Adv Exp Social Psychol 2006, 38:69-119.
• [34]Sturt J, Taylor H, Docherty A, Dale J, Louise T: A psychological approach to providing self-management education for people with type 2 diabetes: the diabetes manual. BMC Fam Pract 2006, 7:70. BioMed Central Full Text
• [35]Murchie P, Hannaford PC, Wyke S, Nicolson MC, Campbell NC: Designing an integrated follow-up programme for people treated for cutaneous malignant melanoma: a practical application of the MRC framework for the design and evaluation of complex interventions to improve health. Fam Pract 2007, 24:283-292.
• [36]Bonetti D, Eccles M, Johnson M, Steen N, Grimshaw J, Baker R, Walker A, Pitts N: Guiding the design and selection of interventions to influence the implementation of evidence-based practice: an experimental simulation of a complex intervention trial. Soc Sci Med 2005, 60:2135-2147.
• [37]Hilton S, Bedford H, Calnan M, Hunt K: Competency, confidence and conflicting evidence: key issues affecting health visitors’ use of research evidence in practice. BMC Nurs 2009, 8:4. BioMed Central Full Text
• [38]Duncan E, Murray J: The barriers and facilitators to routine outcome measurement by allied health professionals in practice: a systematic review. BMC Health Serv Res 2012, 12:96. BioMed Central Full Text
• [39]Kolehmainen N, MacLennan G, Ternent L, Duncan EAS, Duncan EM, Ryan S, McKee L, Francis J: Using shared goal setting to improve access and equity: a mixed methods study of the Good Goals intervention in children’s occupational therapy. Implement Sci 2012, 7:76. BioMed Central Full Text