Abstract
BackgroundImplementation strategies are needed to ensure that evidence-based healthcare interventions are adopted successfully. However, strategies are generally poorly described and those used in everyday practice are seldom reported formally or fully understood. Characterising the active ingredients of existing strategies is necessary to test and refine implementation. We examined whether an implementation strategy, delivered across multiple settings targeting different stakeholders to support a fall prevention programme, could be characterised using the Behaviour Change Technique (BCT) Taxonomy.MethodsData sources included project plans, promotional material, interviews with a purposive sample of stakeholders involved in the strategy’s design and delivery and observations of staff training and information meetings. Data were analysed using TIDieR to describe the strategy and determine the levels at which it operated (organisational, professional, patient). The BCT Taxonomy identified BCTs which were mapped to intervention functions. Data were coded by three researchers and finalised through consensus.ResultsWe analysed 22 documents, 6 interviews and 4 observation sessions. Overall, 21 out a possible 93 BCTs were identified across the three levels. At an organisational level, identifiable techniques tended to be broadly defined; the most common BCT was restructuring the social environment. While some activities were intended to encourage implementation, they did not have an immediate behavioural target and could not be coded using BCTs.The largest number and variety of BCTs were used at the professional level to target the multidisciplinary teams delivering the programme and professionals referring to the programme. The main BCTs targeting the multidisciplinary team were instruction on how to perform the (assessment) behaviour and demonstration of (assessment) behaviour; the main BCT targeting referrers was adding objects to the environment. At the patient level, few BCTs were used to target attendance.ConclusionIn this study, several behaviour change techniques were evident at the individual professional level; however, fewer techniques were identifiable at an organisational level. The BCT Taxonomy was useful for describing components of a multilevel implementation strategy that specifically target behaviour change. To fully and completely describe an implementation strategy, including components that involve organisational or systems level change, other frameworks may be needed.
Highlights
Implementation strategies are needed to ensure that evidence-based healthcare interventions are adopted successfully
Participants’ activities to shape knowledge, attitudes and intentions to act in future At the organisational level, we found many implementation activities could not be coded using any of the Behaviour Change Technique (BCT) and that they appeared to target attitudes rather than immediate behaviour change
Utility of the BCT Taxonomy Like Steinmo et al, we found that this systematic approach could be applied ‘post hoc’ to an existing implementation strategy that was developed pragmatically based on organisational knowledge and experience
Summary
Implementation strategies are needed to ensure that evidence-based healthcare interventions are adopted successfully. We examined whether an implementation strategy, delivered across multiple settings targeting different stakeholders to support a fall prevention programme, could be characterised using the Behaviour Change Technique (BCT) Taxonomy. Implementation strategies are increasingly recognised as essential for realising the full benefits of evidence-based healthcare, and many have been shown to be effective in changing clinical practice [2, 3]. An implementation strategy is typically a broad ‘package’ of techniques wrapped around, and often obscured by, the intervention designed to produce health outcomes [5]. Distinguishing between an intervention and its implementation strategy is an important first step in testing the efficacy of strategies and selecting appropriate outcomes to assess implementation success [6]. In an analysis of quality improvement studies, Bosch and colleagues found that the reasons for believing a particular strategy would overcome a particular barrier to change were often not explained [11]
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.