Process evaluation of a randomised controlled trial of a diabetes prevention intervention in Dutch primary health care: the SLIMMER study

A systematic review of the mechanisms influencing engagement in diabetes prevention programmes for people with pre-diabetes

AIMS

To identify barriers and enablers that influence engagement in and acceptability of diabetes prevention programmes for people with pre-diabetes. The results will provide insights for developing strategies and recommendations to improve design and delivery of diabetes prevention programmes with enhanced engagement and acceptability for people with pre-diabetes.

METHODS

This review used a critical realist approach to examine context and mechanisms of diabetes prevention programmes. Medline, Embase, PsycInfo, Cinahl, Web of Science, Scopus and Pre-Medline were searched for English language studies published between 2000 and 2023. A quality assessment was conducted using Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal tools.

RESULTS

A total of 90 papers met inclusion criteria. The included studies used a variety of quantitative and qualitative methodologies. Data extracted focused on barriers and enablers to engagement in and acceptability of diabetes prevention programmes, with seven key mechanisms identified. These included financial, environmental, personal, healthcare, social and cultural, demographic and programme mechanisms. Findings highlighted diverse factors that influenced engagement in preventive programmes and the importance of considering these factors when planning, developing and implementing future diabetes prevention programmes.

CONCLUSIONS

Mechanisms identified in this review can inform design and development of diabetes prevention programmes for people with pre-diabetes and provide guidance for healthcare professionals and policymakers. This will facilitate increased participation and engagement in preventive programmes, potentially reducing progression and/or incidence of pre-diabetes to type 2 diabetes and improving health outcomes.

Implementation of Combined Lifestyle Interventions for Children with Overweight or Obesity: Experiences of Healthcare Professionals in Multiple Communities

BACKGROUND

To counteract children with obesity, different protocols for combined lifestyle interventions (CLIs) are implemented by healthcare providers (HCPs). To understand the effects of CLI, we studied the implementation process, facilitators and barriers experienced by HCPs.

METHODS

A multiple case study design in which community-based CLIs (n = 4), implemented in a total of ten different communities, are conceptualized as a "case". Qualitative data were collected via group interviews among HCPs (n = 48) regarding their implementation protocol, their network involvement and the adoption of the CLI in a community. Transcripts were coded and analysed using ATLAS.ti.

RESULTS

Barriers were the absence of a proper protocol, the low emphasis on the construction of the network and difficulty in embedding the CLI into the community. Funding for these activities was lacking. Facilitating factors were the involvement of a coordinator and to have everyone's role regarding signalling, diagnosis, guidance and treatment clearly defined and protocolled. HCPs suggested adding certain professions to their team because they lacked expertise in parenting advice and providing mental support to children.

CONCLUSIONS

Carrying out and adapting the content of the CLI to the community was experienced as easier compared to the management of the organizational aspects of the CLI. For these aspects, separate funding is essential. In the future, mapping the characteristics of a community will help to clarify this influence on the implementation even better.

Influences of decisions to attend a national diabetes prevention programme from people living in a socioeconomically deprived area

AIMS

To explore key influences of decisions in participants from a socioeconomically deprived area to attend the Healthier You: NHS Diabetes Prevention Programme (NHSDPP). The NHSDPP is a lifestyle behaviour change programme for adults with prediabetes living in England.

METHODS

Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 35 participants who had attended the initial assessment, but not yet started the NHSDPP; 23 were classified as "attenders," 12 as "non-attenders" after they were interviewed based on whether they had attended the first NHSDPP session or not. Transcribed interviews were analysed using inductive thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Seven themes were derived from the data. The results demonstrate how understanding type 2 diabetes, making lifestyle changes, comparing themselves with others, having support and certain self-perceptions can all affect individuals' motivation to attend a diabetes prevention programme. Accessibility and practicalities also influenced both motivation and attendance.

CONCLUSIONS

This study identified a range of different influences on decisions to attend a diabetes prevention programme, which programme organisers and healthcare professionals should consider to maximise attendance. Initial communication from general practitioners (GPs) and initial assessments are key points where people's beliefs and understanding could be explored.

Identifying critical features of type two diabetes prevention interventions: A Delphi study with key stakeholders

Aims

This study aims to identify critically important features of digital type two diabetes mellitus (T2DM) prevention interventions.

Methods

A stakeholder mapping exercise was undertaken to identify key end-user and professional stakeholders, followed by a three-round Delphi procedure to generate and evaluate evidence statements related to the critical elements of digital T2DM prevention interventions in terms of product (intervention), price (funding models/financial cost), place (distribution/delivery channels), and promotion (target audiences).

Results

End-user (n = 38) and professional (n = 38) stakeholders including patients, dietitians, credentialed diabetes educators, nurses, medical doctors, research scientists, and exercise physiologists participated in the Delphi study. Fifty-two critical intervention characteristics were identified. Future interventions should address diet, physical activity, mental health (e.g. stress, diabetes-related distress), and functional health literacy, while advancing behaviour change support. Programs should be delivered digitally or used multiple delivery modes, target a range of population subgroups including children, and be based on collaborative efforts between national and local and government and non-government funded organisations.

Conclusions

Our findings highlight strong support for digital health to address T2DM in Australia and identify future directions for T2DM prevention interventions. The study also demonstrates the feasibility and value of stakeholder-led intervention development processes.

Process evaluation of the Sophia Step Study- a primary care based three-armed randomized controlled trial using self-monitoring of steps with and without counseling in prediabetes and type 2 diabetes

Background

Describing implementation features of an intervention is required to compare interventions and to inform policy and best practice. The aim of this study was to conduct a process evaluation of the first 12 months of the Sophia Step Study: a primary care based RCT evaluating a multicomponent (self-monitoring of daily steps plus counseling) and a single component (self-monitoring of steps only) physical activity intervention to standard care on cardiometabolic health.

Methods

The evaluation was guided by the Medical Research Council Guidance for complex interventions. To describe the implementation communication with the health professionals implementing the interventions, attendance records and tracking of days with self-monitored pedometer-determined steps were used. Change in physical activity behaviour was measured at baseline, 6 and 12 months as daily steps by accelerometry.

Results

During April 2013 to January 2018 188 participants were randomized and intervened directly after inclusion. Response rate was 49% and drop out was 10%. A majority, 78%, had type 2 diabetes and 22% were diagnosed with prediabetes. Mean [Standard deviation (SD)] body mass index was 30.4 (4.4) kg/m² and steps per day was 6566 (3086). The interventions were delivered as intended with minor deviation from the protocol and dose received was satisfying for both the multicomponent and single component group. The mean [95% Confidence Interval (CI)] change in daily steps from baseline to 6 months was 941(227, 1655) steps/day for the multicomponent intervention group, 990 (145, 1836) step/day for the single component group and − 506 (− 1118, 107) for the control group. The mean (95% CI) change in daily steps from baseline to 12 months was 31(− 507, 570) steps/day for the multicomponent intervention group, 144 (− 566, 853) step/day for the single component group and − 890 (− 1485, − 294) for the control group. There was a large individual variation in daily steps at baseline as well as in step change in all three groups.

Conclusions

Applying self-monitoring of steps is a feasible method to implement as support for physical activity in the primary care setting both with and without counseling support.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02374788. Registered 2 March 2015.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12889-021-11222-9.

Implementation, mechanisms of impact and key contextual factors involved in outcomes of the Modification of Diet, Exercise and Lifestyle (MODEL) randomised controlled trial in Australian adults: protocol for a mixed-method process evaluation

INTRODUCTION

The Modification of Diet, Exercise and Lifestyle (MODEL) study aims to examine the impact of providing visualisation and pictorial representation of advanced structural vascular disease (abdominal aortic calcification), on 'healthful' improvements to diet and lifestyle. This paper reports the protocol for the process evaluation for the MODEL study.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

The overall aim of the process evaluation is to understand the processes that took place during participation in the MODEL study trial and which elements were effective or ineffective for influencing 'healthful' behavioural change, and possible ways of improvement to inform wider implementation strategies. A mixed-method approach will be employed with the use of structured questionnaires and semistructured in-depth interviews. All 200 participants enrolled in the trial will undertake the quantitative component of the study and maximum variation sampling will be used to select a subsample for the qualitative component. The sample size for the qualitative component will be determined based on analytical saturation. Interviews will be digitally recorded and transcribed verbatim. Qualitative data will be analysed thematically and reported according to the Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Research (COREQ) guidelines.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The MODEL study process evaluation has received approval from Edith Cowan University Human Research Ethics Committee (Project Number: 20513 HODGSON). Written informed consent will be obtained from all participants before they are included in the study. The study results will be shared with the individuals and institutions associated with this study as well as academic audiences through peer-reviewed publication and probable presentation at conferences.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ACTRN12618001087246.

A systematic review of the use and reporting of evaluation frameworks within evaluations of physical activity interventions

BACKGROUND

Evaluation of physical activity interventions is vital to inform, and justify, evidence-based policy and practice to support population-wide changes in physical activity. Several evaluation frameworks and guidance documents have been developed to facilitate the evaluation and reporting of evaluation studies in public health. However, there is a lack of evidence about whether frameworks are being used to guide evaluation. There continues to be claims of poor and inconsistent reporting in evaluation studies. The aim of this review was to assess the use of evaluation frameworks and the quality of reporting of how they were applied within evaluation studies of physical activity interventions.

OBJECTIVES

1. To identify whether evaluation frameworks are reported to have been used within evaluation studies of physical activity interventions, and which frameworks have been used. 2. To appraise the quality of reporting with regards to how evaluation frameworks have been used.

METHOD

We developed a checklist of indicators to enable a critical appraisal of the use and reporting of different evaluation frameworks in evaluation studies. We conducted a systematic search and review of evaluation studies published between 2015 and the date of the search to appraise the use and reporting of evaluation frameworks. A narrative synthesis is provided.

RESULTS

The review identified 292 evaluation studies of physical activity interventions, only 69 (23%) of these mentioned using an evaluation framework, and only 16 different frameworks were referred to. There was variation in the quality of reporting of framework use. 51 (74%) studies were identified as being explicitly based on the stated framework, however only 26 (38%) provided detailed descriptions consistently across all the checklist indicators. Details of adaptations and limitations in how frameworks were applied were less frequently reported. The review also highlighted variability in the reporting of intervention components. More consistent and precise reporting of framework and intervention components is needed.

CONCLUSION

Evaluation frameworks can facilitate a more systematic evaluation report and we argue their limited use suggests missed opportunities to apply frameworks to guide evaluation and reporting in evaluation studies. Variability in the quality of reporting of framework use limits the comparability and transferability of evidence. Where a framework has been used, the checklist of indicators can be employed to facilitate the reporting of an evaluation study and to review the quality of an evaluation report.

The implementation of the coaching on lifestyle (CooL) intervention: lessons learnt

Background

Combined lifestyle interventions (CLIs) are designed to help people who are overweight or obese maintain a healthy new lifestyle. The CooL intervention is a CLI in the Netherlands, in which lifestyle coaches counsel adults and children (and/or their parents) who are obese or at high risk of obesity to achieve a sustained healthier lifestyle. The intervention consists of coaching on lifestyle in group and individual sessions, addressing the topics of physical activity, dietary behaviours, sleep, stress management and behavioural change. The aim of this study was to evaluate the implementation process of the Coaching on Lifestyle (CooL) intervention and its facilitating and impeding factors.

Methods

Mixed methods were used in this action-oriented study. Both quantitative (number of referrals, attendance lists of participants and questionnaires) and qualitative (group and individual interviews, observations, minutes and open questions) data were collected among participants, lifestyle coaches, project group members and other stakeholders. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research was used to analyse the data.

Results

CooL was evaluated by stakeholders and participants as an accessible and useful programme, because of its design and content and the lifestyle coaches’ approach. However, stakeholders indicated that the lifestyle coaches need to become more familiar in the health care network and public sectors in the Netherlands. Lifestyle coaching is a novel profession and the added value of the lifestyle coach is not always acknowledged by all health care providers. Lifestyle coaches play a crucial role in ensuring the impact of CooL by actively networking, using clear communication materials and creating stakeholders’ support and understanding.

Conclusion

The implementation process needs to be strengthened in terms of creating support for and providing clear information about lifestyle coaching. The CooL intervention was implemented in multiple regions, thanks to the efforts of many stakeholders. Lifestyle coaches should engage in networking activities and entrepreneurship to boost the implementation process. It takes considerable time for a lifestyle coach to become fully incorporated in primary care.

Trial registration

NTR6208; date registered: 13–01-2017; retrospectively registered; Netherlands Trial Register.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12913-019-4457-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Response bias to a randomised controlled trial of a lifestyle intervention in people at high risk of cardiovascular disease: a cross-sectional analysis

Background

Research evaluating lifestyle interventions for prevention of cardiovascular disease (CVD) may not reach those most at risk. We compared the response rate to a randomised controlled trial (RCT) of a lifestyle intervention by CVD risk, ethnicity and level of deprivation.

Methods

Primary care patients with a QRisk2 score ≥ 20% were invited to participate in a RCT of an intensive lifestyle intervention versus usual care. This cross-sectional analysis compares anonymised data of responders and non-responders with multiple logistic regression, using adjusted odds ratios (AORs) for QRisk2 score, ethnicity, Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD 2010) quintile, age and sex.

Results

From 60 general practices, 8902 patients were invited and 1489 responded. The mean age was 67.3 years and 21.0% were female. Of all patients invited, 69.9% were of white ethnic background, 13.9% ethnic minority backgrounds and 16.2% had no ethnicity data recorded in their medical records. Likelihood of response decreased as QRisk2 score increased (AOR 0.82 per 5 percentage points, 95% CI 0.77–0.88). Black African or Caribbean patients (AOR 0.67; 95% CI 0.45–0.98) and those with missing ethnicity data (AOR 0.55; 95% CI 0.46–0.66) were less likely to respond compared to participants of white ethnicity, but there was no difference in the response rates between south Asian and white ethnicity (AOR 1.08; 95% CI 0.84–1.38). Patients residing in the fourth (AOR 0.70; 95% CI 0.56–0.87) and fifth (AOR 0.52; 95% CI 0.40–0.68) most deprived IMD quintile were less likely to respond compared to the least deprived quintile.

Conclusions

Evaluations of interventions intended for those at high risk of CVD may fail to reach those at highest risk. Hard to reach patient groups may require different recruitment strategies to maximise participation in future trials. Improvements in primary care ethnicity data recording is required to aid understanding of how successfully study samples represent the target population.

Trial registration

ISRCTN, ISRCTN84864870. Registered 15 May 2012, 10.1186/ISRCTN84864870.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12889-018-5939-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Determinants of lifestyle behavior change to prevent type 2 diabetes in high-risk individuals

Background

Although there are many effective lifestyle interventions for type 2 diabetes (T2DM) prevention, insight into effective intervention pathways, especially of long-term interventions, is often lacking. This study aims to provide insight into the effective intervention pathways of the SLIMMER diabetes prevention intervention using mediation analyses.

Methods

In total, 240 participants at increased risk of T2DM were included in the analyses over 18 months. The intervention was a combined lifestyle intervention with a dietary and a physical activity (PA) component. The primary and secondary outcomes were change in fasting insulin (pmol/L) and change in body weight (kg) after 18 months, respectively. Firstly, in a multiple mediator model, we investigated whether significant changes in these outcomes were mediated by changes in dietary and PA behavior. Secondly, in multiple single mediator models, we investigated whether changes in dietary and PA behavior were mediated by changes in behavioral determinants and the participants’ psychological profile. The mediation analyses used linear regression models, where significance of indirect effects was calculated with bootstrapping.

Results

The effect of the intervention on decreased fasting insulin was 40% mediated by change in dietary and PA behavior, where dietary behavior was an independent mediator of the association (34%). The effect of the intervention on decreased body weight was 20% mediated by change in dietary and PA behavior, where PA behavior was an independent mediator (17%). The intervention significantly changed intake of fruit, fat from bread spread, and fiber from bread. Change in fruit intake was mediated by change in action control (combination of consciousness, self-control, and effort), motivation, self-efficacy, intention, and skills. Change in fat intake was mediated by change in action control and psychological profile. No mediators could be identified for change in fiber intake. The change in PA behavior was mediated by change in action control, motivation, and psychological profile.

Conclusion

The effect of the SLIMMER intervention on fasting insulin and body weight was mediated by changes in dietary and PA behavior, in distinct ways. These results indicate that changing dietary as well as PA behavior is important in T2DM prevention.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12966-017-0532-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.