Paul Flowers, Ruth Leiser, Fiona Mapp, Julie McLeod, Oliver Stirrup, Christopher J. R. Illingworth, James Blackstone, Judith Breuer
{"title":"使用行为改变轮方法的定性过程评估:用于减少英国医院内严重急性呼吸系统综合征冠状病毒2型的全基因组序列报告表(SRF)是否如预期那样运行?","authors":"Paul Flowers, Ruth Leiser, Fiona Mapp, Julie McLeod, Oliver Stirrup, Christopher J. R. Illingworth, James Blackstone, Judith Breuer","doi":"10.1111/bjhp.12666","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Purpose</h3>\n \n <p>The aim of this study was to conduct a process evaluation of a whole-genome sequence report form (SRF) used to reduce nosocomial SARS-CoV-2 through changing infection prevention and control (IPC) behaviours within the COVID-19 pandemic.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>We used a three-staged design. Firstly, we described and theorized the purported content of the SRF using the behaviour change wheel (BCW). Secondly, we used inductive thematic analysis of one-to-one interviews (<i>n</i> = 39) to explore contextual accounts of using the SRF. Thirdly, further deductive analysis gauged support for the intervention working as earlier anticipated.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>It was possible to theorize the SRF using the BCW approach and visualize it within a simple logic model. Inductive thematic analyses identified the SRF's acceptability, ease of use and perceived effectiveness. However, major challenges to embedding it in routine practice during the unfolding COVID-19 crisis were reported. Notwithstanding this insight, deductive analysis showed support for the putative intervention functions ‘<i>Education</i>’, ‘<i>Persuasion</i>’ and ‘<i>Enablement</i>’; behaviour change techniques ‘1.2 <i>Problem solving</i>’, ‘2.6 <i>Biofeedback</i>’, ‘2.7 <i>Feedback on outcomes of behaviour</i>’ and ‘7.1 <i>Prompts and cues</i>’; and theoretical domains framework domains ‘<i>Knowledge</i>’ and ‘<i>Behavioural regulation</i>’.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>Our process evaluation of the SRF, using the BCW approach to describe and theorize its content, provided granular support for the SRF working to change IPC behaviours as anticipated. However, our complementary inductive thematic analysis highlighted the importance of the local context in constraining its routine use. For SRFs to reach their full potential in reducing nosocomial infections, further implementation research is needed.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":48161,"journal":{"name":"British Journal of Health Psychology","volume":"28 4","pages":"1011-1035"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/bjhp.12666","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A qualitative process evaluation using the behaviour change wheel approach: Did a whole genome sequence report form (SRF) used to reduce nosocomial SARS-CoV-2 within UK hospitals operate as anticipated?\",\"authors\":\"Paul Flowers, Ruth Leiser, Fiona Mapp, Julie McLeod, Oliver Stirrup, Christopher J. R. Illingworth, James Blackstone, Judith Breuer\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/bjhp.12666\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Purpose</h3>\\n \\n <p>The aim of this study was to conduct a process evaluation of a whole-genome sequence report form (SRF) used to reduce nosocomial SARS-CoV-2 through changing infection prevention and control (IPC) behaviours within the COVID-19 pandemic.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Methods</h3>\\n \\n <p>We used a three-staged design. Firstly, we described and theorized the purported content of the SRF using the behaviour change wheel (BCW). Secondly, we used inductive thematic analysis of one-to-one interviews (<i>n</i> = 39) to explore contextual accounts of using the SRF. Thirdly, further deductive analysis gauged support for the intervention working as earlier anticipated.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Results</h3>\\n \\n <p>It was possible to theorize the SRF using the BCW approach and visualize it within a simple logic model. Inductive thematic analyses identified the SRF's acceptability, ease of use and perceived effectiveness. However, major challenges to embedding it in routine practice during the unfolding COVID-19 crisis were reported. Notwithstanding this insight, deductive analysis showed support for the putative intervention functions ‘<i>Education</i>’, ‘<i>Persuasion</i>’ and ‘<i>Enablement</i>’; behaviour change techniques ‘1.2 <i>Problem solving</i>’, ‘2.6 <i>Biofeedback</i>’, ‘2.7 <i>Feedback on outcomes of behaviour</i>’ and ‘7.1 <i>Prompts and cues</i>’; and theoretical domains framework domains ‘<i>Knowledge</i>’ and ‘<i>Behavioural regulation</i>’.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\\n \\n <p>Our process evaluation of the SRF, using the BCW approach to describe and theorize its content, provided granular support for the SRF working to change IPC behaviours as anticipated. However, our complementary inductive thematic analysis highlighted the importance of the local context in constraining its routine use. For SRFs to reach their full potential in reducing nosocomial infections, further implementation research is needed.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48161,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"British Journal of Health Psychology\",\"volume\":\"28 4\",\"pages\":\"1011-1035\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/bjhp.12666\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"British Journal of Health Psychology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/bjhp.12666\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British Journal of Health Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/bjhp.12666","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
A qualitative process evaluation using the behaviour change wheel approach: Did a whole genome sequence report form (SRF) used to reduce nosocomial SARS-CoV-2 within UK hospitals operate as anticipated?
Purpose
The aim of this study was to conduct a process evaluation of a whole-genome sequence report form (SRF) used to reduce nosocomial SARS-CoV-2 through changing infection prevention and control (IPC) behaviours within the COVID-19 pandemic.
Methods
We used a three-staged design. Firstly, we described and theorized the purported content of the SRF using the behaviour change wheel (BCW). Secondly, we used inductive thematic analysis of one-to-one interviews (n = 39) to explore contextual accounts of using the SRF. Thirdly, further deductive analysis gauged support for the intervention working as earlier anticipated.
Results
It was possible to theorize the SRF using the BCW approach and visualize it within a simple logic model. Inductive thematic analyses identified the SRF's acceptability, ease of use and perceived effectiveness. However, major challenges to embedding it in routine practice during the unfolding COVID-19 crisis were reported. Notwithstanding this insight, deductive analysis showed support for the putative intervention functions ‘Education’, ‘Persuasion’ and ‘Enablement’; behaviour change techniques ‘1.2 Problem solving’, ‘2.6 Biofeedback’, ‘2.7 Feedback on outcomes of behaviour’ and ‘7.1 Prompts and cues’; and theoretical domains framework domains ‘Knowledge’ and ‘Behavioural regulation’.
Conclusions
Our process evaluation of the SRF, using the BCW approach to describe and theorize its content, provided granular support for the SRF working to change IPC behaviours as anticipated. However, our complementary inductive thematic analysis highlighted the importance of the local context in constraining its routine use. For SRFs to reach their full potential in reducing nosocomial infections, further implementation research is needed.
期刊介绍:
The focus of the British Journal of Health Psychology is to publish original research on various aspects of psychology that are related to health, health-related behavior, and illness throughout a person's life. The journal specifically seeks articles that are based on health psychology theory or discuss theoretical matters within the field.