Dataset Information

Developing a complex intervention whilst considering implementation: the TANDEM (Tailored intervention for ANxiety and DEpression Management) intervention for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).

ABSTRACT:

Background

Guidelines now call for a thorough and comprehensive description of the development of healthcare interventions to aid evaluation and understanding of the processes of change. This was the primary aim of this study but we also recognised that effective interventions are commonly not implemented in clinical practice. It is suggested that insufficient attention is given to the implementation process at the development phase of interventions. This study outlines the 5 step iterative process we adopted for considering both implementation and effectiveness issues from the outset of intervention development. We use the development of a complex intervention Tailored intervention for ANxiety and DEpression Management (TANDEM) in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease to illustrate this process.

Methods

Intervention development built upon the Medical Research Council framework for developing complex interventions and the person-based approach for development of behavioural interventions. Building an expert team, specifying theory, qualitative data collection and pre-piloting were all critical steps in our intervention development and are described here.

Results

Contact with experts in the field, and explicitly building on previous work, ensured efficiency of design. Qualitative work suggested guiding principles for the intervention such as introducing mood in relation to breathlessness, and providing flexible tailoring to patients' needs, whilst implementation principles focused on training selected respiratory professionals and requiring supervision to ensure standards of care. Subsequent steps of intervention development, pre-piloting and intervention refinement led to an intervention that was deemed acceptable and if successful will be ready for implementation.

Conclusions

The TANDEM study was developed efficiently by building on previous work and considering implementation issues from the outset, with the aim that if shown to be effective it will have more rapid translation in to the health care system with accelerated patient benefits.

Trial registration

ISRCTN ISRCTN59537391 . Registered on 20 March 2017. Protocol version 6.0, 22 April 2018.

SUBMITTER: Steed L

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8025339 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:People with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) are at increased risk of depression and anxiety, which greatly reduces their quality of life and is associated with worse outcomes; but these psychological co-morbidities are under-recognised and undertreated in COPD patients. Pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) improves mood for up to 6 months but health practitioners under-refer, and patients commonly fail to attend/complete PR. Research suggests that complex non-pharmacological interventions, including both psychological and exercise components, may reduce anxiety and depression in COPD. We have developed a tailored, cognitive behavioural approach (CBA) intervention for patients with COPD and co-morbid anxiety and/or depression ('TANDEM'), which precedes and optimises the benefits of currently offered PR. We hypothesise that such a psychological intervention, delivered by supervised, trained respiratory healthcare professionals, will improve mood in patients with mild to moderate anxiety and/or depression and encourage uptake and completion of PR. METHODS:We will conduct a multi-centre, pragmatic, randomised controlled trial of the TANDEM intervention compared to usual care across the Midlands, London, the South East and Bristol, UK. We will train healthcare professionals familiar with COPD to deliver the manualised, tailored, face-to-face, one-to-one intervention weekly for 6-8?weeks. We will recruit 430 participants from primary, community and secondary care with confirmed COPD and moderate to very severe airflow limitation, who are eligible for assessment for PR, and who screen positive for symptoms of mild/moderate depression and/or anxiety using the Hospital Anxiety and Depression scale (HADS). Participants will be randomised 1.25:1 (intervention: usual care). The co-primary outcomes are the HADS anxiety and depression subscale scores at 6?months; participants will be followed up to 12?months. Secondary outcomes include uptake and completion of PR and healthcare resource use. There will be a parallel process evaluation and a health economic evaluation. DISCUSSION:The TANDEM intervention has the potential to optimise the unrealised synergy between a psychological intervention and PR. The CBA sessions will precede PR and target individuals' cognitions, behaviours and symptoms associated with anxiety and depression to decrease psychological morbidity and increase effective self-management amongst patients with COPD. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ISRCTN, ID: ISRCTN59537391. Registered on 20 March 2017. Protocol version 6.0, 22 April 2018.

Project description:BACKGROUND: Health professionals' behaviour is a key component in compliance with evidence-based recommendations. Opinion leaders are an oft-used method of influencing such behaviours in implementation studies, but reliably and cost effectively identifying them is not straightforward. Survey and questionnaire based data collection methods have potential and carefully chosen items can - in theory - both aid identification of opinion leaders and help in the design of an implementation strategy itself. This study compares two methods of identifying opinion leaders for behaviour-change interventions. METHODS: Healthcare professionals working in a single UK mental health NHS Foundation Trust were randomly allocated to one of two questionnaires. The first, slightly longer questionnaire, asked for multiple nominations of opinion leaders, with specific information about the nature of the relationship with each nominee. The second, shorter version, asked simply for a list of named "champions" but no more additional information. We compared, using Chi Square statistics, both the questionnaire response rates and the number of health professionals likely to be influenced by the opinion leaders (i.e. the "coverage" rates) for both questionnaire conditions. RESULTS: Both questionnaire versions had low response rates: only 15% of health professionals named colleagues in the longer questionnaire and 13% in the shorter version. The opinion leaders identified by both methods had a low number of contacts (range of coverage, 2-6 each). There were no significant differences in response rates or coverage between the two identification methods. CONCLUSIONS: The low response and population coverage rates for both questionnaire versions suggest that alternative methods of identifying opinion leaders for implementation studies may be more effective. Future research should seek to identify and evaluate alternative, non-questionnaire based, methods of identifying opinion leaders in order to maximise their potential in organisational behaviour change interventions.

Project description:Investigators recently tested the effectiveness of a collaborative-care intervention for anxiety disorders: Coordinated Anxiety Learning and Management(CALM) []) in 17 primary care clinics around the United States. Investigators also conducted a qualitative process evaluation. Key research questions were as follows: (1) What were the facilitators/barriers to implementing CALM? (2) What were the facilitators/barriers to sustaining CALM after the study was completed?Key informant interviews were conducted with 47 clinic staff members (18 primary care providers, 13 nurses, 8 clinic administrators, and 8 clinic staff) and 14 study-trained anxiety clinical specialists (ACSs) who coordinated the collaborative care and provided cognitive behavioral therapy. The interviews were semistructured and conducted by phone. Data were content analyzed with line-by-line analyses leading to the development and refinement of themes.Similar themes emerged across stakeholders. Important facilitators to implementation included the perception of "low burden" to implement, provider satisfaction with the intervention, and frequent provider interaction with ACSs. Barriers to implementation included variable provider interest in mental health, high rates of part-time providers in clinics, and high social stressors of lower socioeconomic-status patients interfering with adherence. Key sustainability facilitators were if a clinic had already incorporated collaborative care for another disorder and presence of onsite mental health staff. The main barrier to sustainability was funding for the ACS.The CALM intervention was relatively easy to incorporate during the effectiveness trial, and satisfaction was generally high. Numerous implementation and sustainability barriers could limit the reach and impact of widespread adoption. Findings should be interpreted with the knowledge that the ACSs in this study were provided and trained by the study. Future research should explore uptake of CALM and similar interventions without the aid of an effectiveness trial.

Project description:An important prerequisite for the Chronic Care Model is to be able to identify, in a valid, simple and inexpensive way, the population with a chronic condition that needs proactive and planned care. We investigated if a set of administrative data could be used to identify patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease in a Danish population.Seven general practices were asked to identify patients with known Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease in their practices. For the 266 patients (population A), we used administrative data on hospital admissions for lung-related diagnoses, redeemed prescriptions for lung-diseases drugs and lung- function tests combined to develop an algorithm that identified the highest proportion of patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease with the fewest criteria involved. We tested nine different algorithms combining two to four criteria. The simplest algorithm with highest positive predictive value identified 532 patients (population B); with possible diagnosis of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease in five general practices. The doctors were asked to confirm the diagnosis. The same algorithm identified 2,895 patients whom were asked to confirm their diagnosis (population C).In population A the chosen algorithm had a positive predictive value of 72.2?% and three criteria: a) discharged patients with a chronic lung-disease diagnosis at least once during the preceding 5 years; or b) redeemed prescription of lung-medication at least twice during the preceding 12 months; or c) at least two spirometries performed at different dates during the preceding 12 months. In population B the positive predictive value was 65.0?% [60.8;69.1?%] and the sensitivity 44.8?% [41.3;48.4?%)] when the "uncertain" were added to where doctors agreed with the diagnosis. For the 1,984 respondents in population C, the positive predictive value was 72.9?% [70.8;74.8?%] and the sensitivity 29.7?% [28.4;31.0?%].An algorithm based on administrative data has been developed and validated with sufficient positive predictive value to be used as a tool for identifying patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease. Some of the identified patients had other chronic lung-diseases (asthma). The algorithm should mostly be regarded as a tool for identifying chronic lung-disease and further development of the algorithm is needed.www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT01228708).

Project description:Background: Currently, the eHealth field calls for detailed descriptions of theory-based interventions in order to support improved design of such interventions. This article aims to provide a systematic description of the design rationale behind an interactive web-based tailored intervention promoting HPV-vaccination acceptability. Methods: The 6-step Intervention Mapping (IM) protocol was used to describe the design rationale. After the needs assessment in Step 1, intervention objectives were formulated in Step 2. In Step 3, we translated theoretical methods into practical applications, which were integrated into a coherent intervention in Step 4. In Step 5, we anticipated future implementation and adoption, and finally, an evaluation plan was generated in Step 6. Results: Walking through the various steps of IM resulted in a detailed description of the intervention. The needs assessment indicated HPV-vaccination uptake remaining lower than expected. Mothers play the most important role in decision-making about their daughter's immunization. However, they generally feel ambivalent after they made their decisions, and their decisions are based on rather unstable grounds. Therefore, intervention objectives were to improve HPV-vaccination uptake and informed decision-making, and to decrease decisional conflict among mothers of invited girls. Computer-tailoring was chosen as the main method; virtual assistants were chosen as a practical application to deliver interactive tailored feedback. To maximize compatibility with the needs of the target group, a user-centered design strategy by means of focus groups and online experiments was applied. In these, prototypes were tested and sequentially refined. Finally, efficacy, effectiveness, and acceptability of the intervention were tested in a randomized controlled trial. Results showed a significant positive effect of the intervention on informed decision-making, decisional conflict, and nearly all determinants of HPV-vaccination uptake (P < 0.001). Mothers evaluated the intervention as highly positive. Discussion: Using IM led to an innovative effective intervention for promoting HPV-vaccination acceptability. The intervention maps will aid in interpreting the results of our evaluation studies. Moreover, it will ease the comparison of design rationales across interventions, and may provide leads for the development of other eHealth interventions. This paper adds to the plea for systematic reporting of design rationales constituting the process of developing interventions.