Dataset Information

Protocol for #iBeatCRC: a community-based intervention to increase early-onset colorectal cancer awareness using a sequential explanatory mixed-methods approach.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Th last two decades have seen a twofold increase in colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence among individuals under the recommended screening age of 50 years. Although the origin of this early-onset CRC (EOCRC) spike remains unknown, prior studies have reported that EOCRC harbours a distinct molecular and clinical phenotype in younger individuals. The sharp increase in EOCRC incidence rates may be attributable to a complex interplay of factors, including race; lifestyle; and ecological, sociodemographic and geographical factors. However, more research that address psychosocial experiences and accounts for lifestyle-related behaviours before, during and after an EOCRC diagnosis are warranted. This study aims to develop and pilot test a theory-driven, community-based intervention to increase awareness of EOCRC, reduce its associated risk factors and improve early detection among adults aged 18-49 years.

Methods and analysis

Guided by the Behaviour Change Wheel, we will use a multistage mixed-methods study design. We will pilot a sequential mixed-methods intervention study as follows: (1) First, we will analyse linked quantitative data from the Utah Cancer Registry and National Cancer Institute Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results registry, linked to state-wide demographic and vital records in the Utah Population Database to identify EOCRC hotspots in Utah by examining the EOCRC incidence and survival variance explained by personal and county-level factors. (2) Next, we will conduct one-on-one interviews with 20 EOCRC survivors residing in EOCRC hotspots to ascertain psychosocial and lifestyle challenges that accompany an EOCRC diagnosis. (3) Finally, we will consider existing evidence-based approaches, our integrated results (quantitative +qualitative) and community action board input to design a community-based intervention to increase EOCRC awareness that can feasibly be delivered by means of outdoor mass media, and via social media. We will pilot the multicomponent media campaign with a quasiexperimental design among 17 EOCRC hotspot residents and 17 EOCRC 'coldspot' residents.

Ethics and dissemination

Ethics approval was obtained from the University of Utah Institutional Review Board (IRB_00138357). Signed informed consent will be obtained from all participants prior to any data collection. Study results will be disseminated through CRC community blogs, targeted infographics, conference presentations at national and international professional conferences and publications in peer-reviewed journals. Final intervention-specific data will be available on reasonable request from the corresponding author.

Trial registration number

NCT04715074.

SUBMITTER: Rogers CR

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8647393 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundEvaluation of complex interventions should include a process evaluation to give evaluators, researchers, and policy makers greater confidence in the outcomes reported from RCTs. Implementation fidelity can be part of a process evaluation and refers to the degree to which an intervention is delivered according to protocol. The aim of this implementation fidelity study was to evaluate to what extent a dialogue-based psychosocial intervention was delivered according to protocol. A modified conceptual framework for implementation fidelity was used to guide the analysis.MethodsThis study has an explanatory, sequential two-phase mixed methods design. Quantitative process data were collected longitudinally along with data collection in the RCT. Qualitative process data were collected after the last data collection point of the RCT. Descriptive statistical analyses were conducted to describe the sample, the intervention trajectories, and the adherence measures. A scoring system to clarify quantitative measurement of the levels of implementation was constructed. The qualitative data sources were analyzed separately with a theory-driven content analysis using categories of adherence and potential moderating factors identified in the conceptual framework of implementation fidelity. The quantitative adherence results were extended with the results from the qualitative analysis to assess which potential moderators may have influenced implementation fidelity and in what way.ResultsThe results show that the core components of the intervention were delivered although the intervention trajectories were individualized. Based on the composite score of adherence, results show that 80.1% of the interventions in the RCT were implemented with high fidelity. Although it is challenging to assess the importance of each of the moderating factors in relation to the other factors and to their influence on the adherence measures, participant responsiveness, comprehensiveness of policy description, context, and recruitment appeared to be the most prominent moderating factors of implementation fidelity in this study.ConclusionsThis evaluation of implementation fidelity and the discussion of what constitutes high fidelity implementation of this intervention are crucial in understanding the factors influencing the trial outcome. The study also highlights important methodological considerations for researchers planning process evaluations and studies of implementation fidelity.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov , NCT02338869; registered 10/04/2014.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Neonatal seizures are difficult to diagnose and, when they are, tradition dictates first line treatment is phenobarbital. There is little data on how consultants diagnose neonatal seizures, choose when to treat or how they choose aetiological investigations or drug treatments. The purpose of this study was to assess the variation across the UK in the management of neonatal seizures and explore paediatricians' views on their diagnosis and treatment. METHODS:An explanatory sequential mixed methods approach was used (QUAN?QUAL) with equal waiting between stages. We collected quantitative data from neonatology staff and paediatric neurologists using a questionnaire sent to neonatal units and via emails from the British Paediatric Neurology Association. We asked for copies of neonatal unit guidelines on the management of seizures. The data from questionnaires was used to identify16 consultants using semi-structured interviews. Thematic analysis was used to interpret qualitative data, which was triangulated with quantitative questionnaire data. RESULTS:One hundred questionnaires were returned: 47.7% thought levetiracetam was as, or equally, effective as phenobarbital; 9.2% thought it was less effective. 79.6% of clinicians had seen no side effects in neonates with levetiracetam. 97.8% of unit guidelines recommended phenobarbital first line, with wide variation in subsequent drug choice, aetiological investigations, and advice on when to start treatment. Thematic analysis revealed three themes: 'Managing uncertainty with neonatal seizures', 'Moving practice forward' and 'Multidisciplinary team working'. Consultants noted collecting evidence on anti-convulsant drugs in neonates is problematic, and recommended a number of solutions, including collaboration to reach consensus guidelines, to reduce diagnostic and management uncertainty. CONCLUSIONS:There is wide variation in the management of neonatal seizures and clinicians face many uncertainties. Our data has helped reveal some of the reasons for current practice and decision making. Suggestions to improve certainty include: educational initiatives to improve the ability of neonatal staff to describe suspicious events, greater use of video, closer working between neonatologists and neurologists, further research, and a national discussion to reach a consensus on a standardised approach to managing neonatal epileptic seizures.

Project description:Backgrounde-Bug is a pan-European educational resource for junior and senior school children, which contains activities covering prudent antibiotic use and the spread, treatment, and prevention of infection. Teaching resources for children aged 7-15 years are complemented by a student website that hosts games and interactive activities for the children to continue their learning at home.ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to appraise young people's opinions of 3 antibiotic games on the e-Bug student website, exploring children's views and suggestions for improvements, and analyzing change in their knowledge around the learning outcomes covered. The 3 games selected for evaluation all contained elements and learning outcomes relating to antibiotics, the correct use of antibiotics, and bacteria and viruses.MethodsA mixed methodological approach was undertaken, wherein 153 pupils aged 9-11 years in primary schools and summer schools in the Bristol and Gloucestershire area completed a questionnaire with antibiotic and microbe questions, before and after playing 3 e-Bug games for a total of 15 minutes. The after questionnaire also contained open-ended and Likert scale questions. In addition, 6 focus groups with 48 students and think-aloud sessions with 4 students who had all played the games were performed.ResultsThe questionnaire data showed a significant increase in knowledge for 2 out of 7 questions (P=.01 and P<.001), whereas all questions showed a small level of increase. The two areas of significant knowledge improvement focused around the use of antibiotics for bacterial versus viral infections and ensuring the course of antibiotics is completed. Qualitative data showed that the e-Bug game "Body Busters" was the most popular, closely followed by "Doctor Doctor," and "Microbe Mania" the least popular.ConclusionsThis study shows that 2 of the e-Bug antibiotic educational games are valuable. "Body Busters" effectively increased antibiotic knowledge in children and had the greatest flow and enjoyment. "Doctor Doctor" also resulted in increased knowledge, but was less enjoyable. "Microbe Mania" had neither flow nor knowledge gain and therefore needs much modification and review. The results from the qualitative part of this study will be very important to inform future modifications and improvements to the e-Bug games.

Project description:BackgroundXylazine is increasingly prevalent in the unregulated opioid supply in the United States. Exposure to this adulterant can lead to significant harm, including prolonged sedation and necrotic wounds. In the absence of literature describing healthcare providers' experiences with treating patients who have been exposed to xylazine, we aimed to explore what gaps must be addressed to improve healthcare education and best practices.MethodsFrom October 2023 to February 2024, we conducted a sequential explanatory mixed-methods study, with (1) a quantitative survey phase utilizing convenience sampling of healthcare providers treating patients in Connecticut and (2) a qualitative semi-structured interview phase utilizing purposive sampling of providers with experience treating patients with xylazine exposure. Summary statistics from the survey were tabulated; interview transcripts were analyzed using thematic analysis.ResultsSeventy-eight eligible healthcare providers participated in our survey. Most participants had heard of xylazine (n = 69, 95.8%) and had some knowledge about this adulterant; however, fewer reported seeing one or more patients exposed to xylazine (n = 46, 59.8%). After sampling from this subgroup, we conducted fifteen in-depth interviews. This qualitative phase revealed five themes: (1) while xylazine is novel and of concern, this is not necessarily exceptional (i.e., there are other emerging issues for patients who use drugs); (2) participants perceived that xylazine was increasingly prevalent in the drug supply, even if they were not necessarily seeing more patients with xylazine-related outcomes (XROs); (3) patients primarily presented with non-XROs, making it difficult to know when conversations about xylazine were appropriate; (4) patients with XROs may experience issues accessing healthcare; (5) providers and their patients are learning together about how to minimize XROs and reduce the sense of helplessness in the face of a novel adulterant.ConclusionsXylazine-specific education for healthcare providers is currently insufficient. Improving this education, as well as resources (e.g., drug checking technologies) and data (e.g., research on prevention and treatment of XROs), is crucial to improve care for patients who use drugs.

Project description:BackgroundPreoperative medical consultations add expense and burden for patients and the impact of these consults on patient outcomes is conflicting. Previous work suggests that 10-40% of preoperative medical consult recommendations are not followed. This limits measurement of the effect of perioperative medical consultation on patient outcomes and represents a quality gap, given the patient time and healthcare cost associated with consultation. We aimed to measure, characterize, and understand reasons for missed recommendations from preoperative medical consultation.MethodsThis explanatory, sequential mixed-methods study used chart audits followed by semi-structured interviews. Chart audit of consecutive patients seen in preoperative medical clinic were reviewed to measure the proportion and characterize the type of recommendations that were not completed ("missed"). This phase informed the interview participants and questions. The interview guide was developed using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research and the Theoretical Domains Framework. Template analysis was used to understand drivers and barriers of missed recommendations RESULTS: Chart audit included 255 patients (n=161, 63.1% female) seen in preadmission clinic between April 1 and April 30, 2019. 55.7% of patients had all recommendations followed (n=142). Postoperative anticoagulation management and postoperative cardiac biomarker surveillance recommendations were least commonly followed (50.0%, n=28, and 68.9%, n=82, respectively). Eighteen surgical team members were interviewed. Missed recommendations were both unintentional and intentional, and the key drivers differed by these categories. Unintentionally missed recommendations occurred due to individual-level factors (drivers: knowledge of the consultation note, lack of routine for reviewing the consultation note, and competing demands on time) and systems-level factors (driver: lack of role clarity). Intentionally missed recommendations occurred due to user error due (drivers: lack of knowledge of guidelines or evidence) and appropriate modifications (driver: need to adapt a preoperative plan for a complicated postoperative course).ConclusionsOnly 55.7% of consult notes had all recommendations followed, suggesting a quality gap in perioperative medical care. Qualitative data suggests multiple drivers of missed recommendations that should be targeted to improve the efficiency of care for these patients.

Project description:BackgroundTraumatic brain injury (TBI) is a complex condition common among individuals treated in behavioral healthcare, but TBI screening has not been adopted in these settings which can affect optimal clinical decision-making. Integrating evidence-based practices that address complex health comorbidities into behavioral healthcare settings remains understudied in implementation science, limited by few studies using theory-driven hypotheses to disentangle relationships between proximal and medial indicators on distal implementation outcomes. Grounded in the Theory of Planned Behavior, we examined providers' attitudes, perceived behavioral control (PBC), subjective norms, and intentions to adopt The Ohio State University TBI Identification Method (OSU TBI-ID) in behavioral healthcare settings.MethodsWe used an explanatory sequential mixed-methods design. In Phase I, 215 providers from 25 organizations in the USA completed training introducing the OSU TBI-ID, followed by a survey assessing attitudes, PBC, norms, and intentions to screen for TBI. After 1 month, providers completed another survey assessing the number of TBI screens conducted. Data were analyzed using structural equation modeling (SEM) with logistic regressions. In Phase II, 20 providers were purposively selected for semi-structured interviews to expand on SEM results. Qualitative data were analyzed using thematic analysis, integrated with quantitative results, and combined into joint displays.ResultsOnly 25% (55/215) of providers adopted TBI screening, which was driven by motivations to trial the intervention. Providers who reported more favorable attitudes (OR: 0.67, p < .001) and greater subjective norms (OR: 0.12, p < .001) toward TBI screening demonstrated increased odds of intention to screen, which resulted in greater TBI screening adoption (OR: 0.30; p < .01). PBC did not affect intentions or adoption. Providers explained that although TBI screening can improve diagnostic and clinical decision-making, they discussed that additional training, leadership engagement, and state-level mandates are needed to increase the widespread, systematic uptake of TBI screening.ConclusionsThis study advances implementation science by using theory-driven hypothesis testing to disentangle proximal and medial indicators at the provider level on TBI screening adoption. Our mixed-methods approach added in-depth contextualization and illuminated additional multilevel determinants affecting intervention adoption, which guides a more precise selection of implementation strategies.

Project description:BackgroundNegative workplace behaviour among nurses is an internationally recognised problem, despite the plethora of literature spanning several decades. The various forms of mistreatments and uncaring attitudes experienced by nurses include workplace aggression, incivility, bullying, harassment and horizontal violence. Negative behaviour has detrimental effects on the individual nurse, the organisation, the nursing profession and patients. Multi-level organisational interventions are warranted to influence the "civility norms" of the nursing profession.ObjectiveThe aim of this study is to investigate the self-reported exposure to and experiences of negative workplace behaviours of nursing staff and their ways of coping in regional acute care hospitals in one Local Health District (LHD) in NSW before and after Respectful Workplace Workshops have been implemented within the organisation.MethodsThis study employs a mixed methods sequential explanatory design with an embedded experimental component, underpinned by Social World's Theory. This study will be carried out in four acute care regional hospitals from a Local Health District (LHD) in New South Wales (NSW), Australia. The nurse unit managers, registered nurses and new graduate nurses from the medical and surgical wards of all four hospitals will be invited to complete a pre-survey examining their experiences, perceptions and responses to negative workplace behaviour, and their ways of coping when exposed. Face-to-face educational workshops will then be implemented by the organisation at two of the four hospitals. The workshops are designed to increase awareness of negative workplace behaviour, the pathways to seek assistance and aims to create respectful workplaces. Commencing 3 months after completion of the workshop implementation, follow up surveys and interviews will then be undertaken at all four hospitals.ResultsThe findings from this research will enhance understanding of negative workplace behaviour occurring within the nursing social world and assess the effectiveness of the LHD's Respectful Workplace Workshops upon the levels of negative workplace behaviour occurring. By integrating qualitative and quantitative findings it will allow for a dual perspective of the social world of nurses where negative and/or respectful workplace behaviours occur, and provide data grounded in individuals lived experiences, positioned in a macro context.ConclusionsIt is expected that evidence from this study will inform nursing practice, and future policy development aimed at creating respectful workplaces.Trial registrationAustralian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (Registration No. ACTRN12618002007213; 14 December 2018).International registered report identifier (irrid)PRR1-10.2196/18643.