Consolidated guidance for behavioral intervention pilot and feasibility studies
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Pfledderer C
PROVIDER: S-EPMC10998328 | biostudies-literature | 2024 Jan
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundImplementation trials aim to test the effects of implementation strategies on the adoption, integration or uptake of an evidence-based intervention within organisations or settings. Feasibility and pilot studies can assist with building and testing effective implementation strategies by helping to address uncertainties around design and methods, assessing potential implementation strategy effects and identifying potential causal mechanisms. This paper aims to provide broad guidance for the conduct of feasibility and pilot studies for implementation trials.MethodsWe convened a group with a mutual interest in the use of feasibility and pilot trials in implementation science including implementation and behavioural science experts and public health researchers. We conducted a literature review to identify existing recommendations for feasibility and pilot studies, as well as publications describing formative processes for implementation trials. In the absence of previous explicit guidance for the conduct of feasibility or pilot implementation trials specifically, we used the effectiveness-implementation hybrid trial design typology proposed by Curran and colleagues as a framework for conceptualising the application of feasibility and pilot testing of implementation interventions. We discuss and offer guidance regarding the aims, methods, design, measures, progression criteria and reporting for implementation feasibility and pilot studies.ConclusionsThis paper provides a resource for those undertaking preliminary work to enrich and inform larger scale implementation trials.
| S-EPMC7603668 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background Pilot feasibility studies serve a uniquely important role in preparing for larger scale intervention trials by examining the feasibility and acceptability of interventions and the methods used to test them. Mixed methods (collecting, analyzing, and integrating quantitative and qualitative data and results) can optimize what can be learned from pilot feasibility studies to prepare rigorous intervention trials. Despite increasing use of mixed method designs in intervention trials, there is limited guidance on how to apply these approaches to address pilot feasibility study goals. The purpose of this article is to offer methodological guidance for how investigators can plan to integrate quantitative and qualitative methods within pilot feasibility studies to comprehensively address key research questions. Methods We used an informal consensus-based process informed by key methodological resources and our team’s complementary expertise as intervention researchers and mixed methodologists to develop guidance for applying mixed methods to optimize what can be learned from pilot feasibility studies. We developed this methodological guidance as faculty in the Mixed Methods Research Training Program (MMRTP) for the Health Sciences (R25MH104660) funded by the National Institutes of Health through the Office of Behavioral and Social Science Research. Results We provide the following guidance for applying mixed methods to optimize pilot feasibility studies: (1) identify feasibility domain(s) that will be examined using mixed methods, (2) align quantitative and qualitative data sources for the domain(s) selected for mixing methods, (3) determine the timing of the quantitative and qualitative data collection within the flow of the pilot study, (4) plan integrative analyses using joint displays to understand feasibility, and (5) prepare to draw meta-inferences about feasibility and implications for the future trial from the integrated data. Conclusions By effectively integrating quantitative and qualitative data within pilot feasibility studies, investigators can harness the potential of mixed methods for developing comprehensive and nuanced understandings about feasibility. Our guidance can help researchers to consider the range of key decisions needed during intervention pilot feasibility testing to achieve a rigorous mixed methods approach generating enhanced insights to inform future intervention trials. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s40814-022-01178-x.
| S-EPMC9511762 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundBehavioral interventions are often complex, operate at multiple levels, across settings, and employ a range of behavior change techniques. Collecting and reporting key indicators of initial trial and intervention feasibility is essential to decisions for progressing to larger-scale trials. The extent of reporting on feasibility indicators and how this may have changed over time is unknown. The aims of this study were to (1) conduct a historical scoping review of the reporting of feasibility indicators in behavioral pilot/feasibility studies related to obesity published through 2020, and (2) describe trends in the amount and type of feasibility indicators reported in studies published across three time periods: 1982-2006, 2011-2013, and 2018-2020.MethodsA search of online databases (PubMed, Embase, EBSCOhost, Web of Science) for health behavior pilot/feasibility studies related to obesity published up to 12/31/2020 was conducted and a random sample of 600 studies, 200 from each of the three timepoints (1982-2006, 2011-2013, and 2018-2020), was included in this review. The presence/absence of feasibility indicators, including recruitment, retention, participant acceptability, attendance, compliance, and fidelity, were identified/coded for each study. Univariate logistic regression models were employed to assess changes in the reporting of feasibility indicators across time.ResultsA total of 16,365 unique articles were identified of which 6873 of these were reviewed to arrive at the final sample of 600 studies. For the total sample, 428 (71.3%) studies provided recruitment information, 595 (99.2%) provided retention information, 219 (36.5%) reported quantitative acceptability outcomes, 157 (26.2%) reported qualitative acceptability outcomes, 199 (33.2%) reported attendance, 187 (31.2%) reported participant compliance, 23 (3.8%) reported cost information, and 85 (14.2%) reported treatment fidelity outcomes. When compared to the Early Group (1982-2006), studies in the Late Group (2018-2020) were more likely to report recruitment information (OR=1.60, 95%CI 1.03-2.49), acceptability-related quantitative (OR=2.68, 95%CI 1.76-4.08) and qualitative (OR=2.32, 95%CI 1.48-3.65) outcomes, compliance outcomes (OR=2.29, 95%CI 1.49-3.52), and fidelity outcomes (OR=2.13, 95%CI 1.21, 3.77).ConclusionThe reporting of feasibility indicators within behavioral pilot/feasibility studies has improved across time, but key aspects of feasibility, such as fidelity, are still not reported in the majority of studies. Given the importance of behavioral intervention pilot/feasibility studies in the translational science spectrum, there is a need for improving the reporting of feasibility indicators.
| S-EPMC10032007 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Formal psychosocial support programs after weight-loss surgery are limited in scope and availability. OBJECTIVE:This randomized pilot study evaluated the feasibility of a postoperative behavioral intervention program. MATERIALS AND METHODS:Postoperative weight-loss surgery patients (N = 50) were recruited from February 2017-July 2017 and randomized to a four-month behavioral program or usual care wait-list. Outcomes evaluated in addition to feasibility included health-related quality of life (Short Form -36), psychosocial functioning and adherence. Secondary outcomes included within-group changes for each outcome. RESULTS:Out of eight possible sessions, intervention participants attended a mean of 4.2 sessions. Intervention group participants experienced greater improvements in the social functioning domain of health-related quality of life compared to usual care. Self-reported dietary adherence in the intervention group remained stable, while usual care group dietary adherence declined. Within the intervention group, participants also reported gains in the physical function, pain and general health aspects of quality life from baseline to post-treatment. No differences in weight, mood or other eating behaviors (e.g., loss of control, emotional eating) were evident between groups. CONCLUSION:Though participation in a postoperative behavioral intervention varied, the program helped participants to maintain aspects of quality of life and self-reported adherence to dietary recommendations. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03092479.
| S-EPMC6802820 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Autism spectrum disorder (ASD), a neurodevelopmental disorder typified by differences in social communication as well as restricted and repetitive behaviors, is often responsive to early behavioral intervention. However, there is limited information on whether such intervention can be augmented with pharmacological approaches. We conducted a double-blinded, placebo-controlled feasibility trial to examine the effects of the β-adrenergic antagonist propranolol combined with early intensive behavioral intervention (EIBI) for children with ASD. Nine participants with ASD, ages three to ten, undergoing EIBI were enrolled and randomized to a 12-week course of propranolol or placebo. Blinded assessments were conducted at baseline, 6 weeks, and 12 weeks. The primary outcome measures focusing on social interaction were the General Social Outcome Measure-2 (GSOM-2) and Social Responsiveness Scale-Second Edition (SRS-2). Five participants completed the 12-week visit. The sample size was insufficient to evaluate the treatment efficacy. However, side effects were infrequent, and participants were largely able to fully participate in the procedures. Conducting a larger clinical trial to investigate propranolol's effects on core ASD features within the context of behavioral therapy will be beneficial, as this will advance and individualize combined therapeutic approaches to ASD intervention. This initial study helps to understand feasibility constraints on performing such a study.
| S-EPMC10605265 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundAfrican Americans are twice as likely to die from diabetes, compared to other racial and ethnic groups in the USA. Poor adherence to diabetes medications is common among African Americans and contributes to these disproportionally worse outcomes. A pilot study was conducted to determine the feasibility and acceptability of a peer-supported intervention targeting diabetes and medication beliefs, communication, and self-efficacy skills to enhance medication adherence among African Americans with type 2 diabetes.MethodsBased on the extended self-regulatory model and information-motivation-behavioral skills model, this intervention was piloted using a single group pre/post-intervention study design at two sites. Seventeen African Americans who self-reported as adherent to diabetes medicines (ambassadors) were paired with 22 African Americans with self-reported poor medication adherence (buddies). Feasibility outcomes evaluated recruitment, retention, and intervention adherence. Measures assessed at baseline and 1-month post-intervention included glycemic control (hemoglobin A1c), self-reported medication adherence, diabetes beliefs, concerns about diabetes medicines, and diabetes self-efficacy. Wilcoxon signed-rank tests assessed for differences in mean scores of outcome variables at baseline compared with a 3-month follow-up. Semi-structured 60-min interviews were conducted with each buddy to explore their acceptability of the intervention. To ensure the rigor of the qualitative data, we focused on analytic criteria such as credibility, confirmability, and transferability.ResultsMost buddies and ambassadors were female and about 56 years old. Feasibility outcomes included recruitment success rates of 73% for buddies and 85% for ambassadors relative to our goals. Retention rate for hemoglobin A1c and medication adherence outcome assessment was 95% for buddies. Both buddies and ambassadors had excellent intervention adherence, with buddies having a mean attendance of 7.76 out of 8 sessions/phone calls and ambassadors completing > 99% of the 105 intervention calls with Buddies. Results showed a signal of change in hemoglobin A1c (effect size = 0.14) and medication adherence (effect size = 0.35) among buddies, reduction in buddies' negative beliefs about diabetes and an increase in necessity beliefs of diabetes medicines. Summative interviews with buddies showed they valued ambassador's encouragement of self-management behaviors.ConclusionsResults support conduct of an efficacy trial to address medication adherence for African Americans with type 2 diabetes using a peer-supported tailored intervention.Trial registrationhttps://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04028076 .
| S-EPMC9660113 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundMany traditional lifestyle interventions use calorie prescriptions, but most individuals have difficulty sustaining calorie tracking and thus weight loss. In contrast, whole food plant-based diets (WFPBDs) have previously shown significant weight loss without this issue. However, most WFPBD interventions are face-to-face and time-intensive, and do not leverage gold standard behavioral strategies for health behavior change.ObjectiveThis open pilot trial was the first to evaluate the feasibility of a fully featured, remotely delivered behavioral weight loss intervention using an ad libitum WFPBD.MethodsOver 12 weeks, participants (N=15) with overweight or obesity received a newly designed program that integrated behavioral weight loss and a WFPBD prescription via weekly web-based modules and brief phone coaching calls. Assessments were performed at baseline, midtreatment (6 weeks), and after treatment (12 weeks).ResultsThe intervention was rated as highly acceptable (mean 4.40 out of 5, SE 0.18), and attrition was low (6.7%). In all, intention-to-treat analyses revealed that 69% (10.4/15) of the participants lost 5% of their weight (mean -5.89, SE 0.68 kg). Predefined benchmarks for quality of life were met.ConclusionsA pilot digital behavioral weight loss intervention with a non-energy-restricted WFPBD was feasible, and the mean acceptability was high. Minimal contact time (80-150 minutes of study interventionist time per participant over 12 weeks) led to clinically relevant weight loss and dietary adherence for most participants (10.4/15, 69% and 11.8/15, 79%, respectively), and quality of life improvements (reliable change indices >1.53). We hope that this work will serve as a springboard for future larger scale randomized controlled studies evaluating the efficacy of such programs for weight loss, dietary change, and quality of life.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT04892030; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04892030.
| S-EPMC9264123 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundHealth behavior and weight management interventions for cancer survivors have the potential to prevent future cancer recurrence and improve long-term health; however, their translation can be limited if the intervention is complex and involves high participant burden. Mobile health (mHealth) offers a delivery modality to integrate interventions into daily life routines.ObjectiveThe objective of this study was to evaluate the effects of a one-group trial with a pre-post evaluation design on engagement (use and acceptability), physiological (weight), behavioral (diet and physical activity), and other secondary outcomes.MethodsThe 10-week intervention consisted of mHealth components (self-monitoring of selected diet behaviors via daily text messages, wireless devices to automatically track weight and steps) and 4 motivational interviewing-based technology-assisted phone sessions with a nonprofessionally trained counselor. Participants were overweight breast cancer survivors who had completed treatment and owned a smartphone. Weight was measured objectively; diet and physical activity were measured with brief self-reported questionnaires.ResultsTen women participated; they had a mean age of 59 years (SD 6), 50% belonged to a racial or ethnic minority group, 50% had some college or less, and 40% reported using Medicaid health insurance. Engagement was high: out of 70 days in total, the mean number of days recording steps via the wristband pedometer was 64 (SD 7), recording a weight via the scale was 45 (SD 24), and responding to text messages was 60 (SD 13); 100% of participants completed all 4 calls with the counselor. Most (90%) were very likely to participate again and recommend the program to others. Mean weight in pounds decreased (182.5 to 179.1, mean change -3.38 [SD 7.67]), fruit and vegetable daily servings increased (2.89 to 4.42, mean change 1.53 [SD 2.82]), and self-reported moderate physical activity increased in metabolic equivalent of task (MET) minutes per week (2791 to 3336, mean change 545 [SD 1694]).ConclusionsFindings support the conduct of a fully powered trial to evaluate the efficacy of mHealth as a feasible intervention modality for breast cancer survivors. Future research should employ accelerometer-based physical activity assessment and consider development of an all-in-one app to integrate devices, messaging, and educational content and other mHealth approaches to support behavioral counselors conducting weight management interventions.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT02387671; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02387671 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6hGEuttbZ).
| S-EPMC5066594 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Depression is more common in youth with type 1 diabetes (T1D) compared to youth without diabetes. This study aims to assess the efficacy of Competent Adulthood Transition with Cognitive Humanistic and Interpersonal Teaching (CATCH-IT), an internet-based cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) intervention, in adolescents with T1D and depressive symptoms. Adolescents (13 to 17 years old) with T1D and mild (score 5-9) or moderate (score 10-14) depressive symptoms on Patient Health Questionnaire-Adolescent (PHQ-A) screening assessment were recruited to participate and received online access to the CATCH-IT modules for 6 months (requested to complete in 12 weeks). Statistical analyses included paired t-test for changes in Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale (CES-D), PHQ-A, Problem Areas in Diabetes-Teen version (PAID-T), and hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c). Nineteen patients were consented, 15 met inclusion criteria and received the intervention. In the seven participants that completed the modules, there was a trend towards improvements in PHQ-A, CES-D and HbA1c. Participants provided robust qualitative feedback on the modules and areas for improvement in subsequent iterations, such as inclusion of diabetes-related content. Given the prevalence of depression in diabetes, feasible, low resource interventions are needed. Internet programs such as CATCH-IT can serve as an effective first line intervention in this high-risk population. A modified version of CATCH-IT tailored for adolescents with T1D may be beneficial in this patient population.
| S-EPMC10839524 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundPilot studies test the feasibility of methods and procedures to be used in larger-scale studies. Although numerous articles describe guidelines for the conduct of pilot studies, few have included specific feasibility indicators or strategies for evaluating multiple aspects of feasibility. In addition, using pilot studies to estimate effect sizes to plan sample sizes for subsequent randomized controlled trials has been challenged; however, there has been little consensus on alternative strategies.MethodsIn Section 1, specific indicators (recruitment, retention, intervention fidelity, acceptability, adherence, and engagement) are presented for feasibility assessment of data collection methods and intervention implementation. Section 1 also highlights the importance of examining feasibility when adapting an intervention tested in mainstream populations to a new more diverse group. In Section 2, statistical and design issues are presented, including sample sizes for pilot studies, estimates of minimally important differences, design effects, confidence intervals (CI) and nonparametric statistics. An in-depth treatment of the limits of effect size estimation as well as process variables is presented. Tables showing CI around parameters are provided. With small samples, effect size, completion and adherence rate estimates will have large CI.ConclusionThis commentary offers examples of indicators for evaluating feasibility, and of the limits of effect size estimation in pilot studies. As demonstrated, most pilot studies should not be used to estimate effect sizes, provide power calculations for statistical tests or perform exploratory analyses of efficacy. It is hoped that these guidelines will be useful to those planning pilot/feasibility studies before a larger-scale study.
| S-EPMC8849521 | biostudies-literature