A mixed methods process evaluation of a person-centred falls prevention program

Integrating Fall Prevention Strategies into EMS Services to Reduce Falls and Associated Healthcare Costs for Older Adults

Purpose

The purpose of this study is to detail the implementation of fall prevention initiatives through emergency medical services (EMS) and associated outcomes.

Methods

Paramedics with MedStar Mobile Healthcare utilized the Stopping Elderly Accidents, Deaths, and Injuries (STEADI) fall prevention model to screen and direct intervention through 9-1-1 emergency response, High Utilization Group (HUG), and 30-day Hospital Readmission Avoidance (HRA) programs. Outcomes from 9-1-1 calls measured the number of older adults screened for falls and identified risk factors. The HUG and HRA programs measured change in quality of life with EuroQol-5D, referral service utilization, falls, emergent healthcare utilization, and hospital readmission data. Analysis included costs associated with reduced healthcare usage.

Results

Emergency paramedics provided fall risk screening for 50.5% (n=45,090) of adults aged 65 and older and 59.3% were at risk of falls, with 48.1% taking medications known to increase the risk of falls. Services provided through the HUG and HRA programs, along with additional needed referral services, resulted in a 37.2% reduction in fall-related 9-1-1 calls and a 29.5% increase in overall health status related to quality of life. Analysis of the HUG program revealed potential savings of over $1 million with a per-patient enrolled savings of $19,053. The HRA program demonstrated a 16.4% hospital readmission rate, in comparison to a regional average of 30.2%, and a cost-savings of $4.95 million or $15,618 per enrolled patient.

Conclusion

Implementation of the STEADI model into EMS services provides an effective and cost-saving model for addressing fall prevention for older adults, provides meaningful and impactful improvement for older adults, and could serve as a model for other EMS programs.

Patient engagement as a core element of translating clinical evidence into practice- application of the COM-B model behaviour change model

BACKGROUND

The results of rehabilitation trials are often not fully attained when the intervention is implemented beyond the initial trial. One of the key reasons is that a patients' ability and/or capacity to take part in their own healthcare is not considered in the trial design yet has significant impact on the outcomes during the implementation phase.

BODY OF TEXT

We propose a shift from a therapist-focus to patient-focus in trial design, through addressing patient engagement as a core consideration in trials. We argue that engaging patients in any rehabilitation program is a process of behavioural change. Exercise prescription is used as an example to illustrate how the Behaviour Change Wheel can be applied to analyse barriers and facilitators associated with patients' capabilities, opportunities and motivations in integrating trial interventions into their daily life. We propose a framework to assist in this shift.

CONCLUSION

A core part of implementing rehabilitation interventions at the primary care level requires patient engagement. Related aspects of interventions should be identified and assessed using the COM-B model at the outset of trial design to ensure that the results are realistic, meaningful and transferable, so as to enable real impact.

Protocol for a Mixed-Methods Process Evaluation of BetterBrains: A Person-Centered Online Intervention to Delay Cognitive Decline in Adults at Risk of Dementia

BACKGROUND

The BetterBrains Randomized Controlled Trial (RCT) will evaluate the effectiveness of an online, person-centered, risk factor management, coaching intervention in community-dwelling, healthy adults at risk of cognitive decline. Multi-component interventions are challenging to evaluate due to program complexity and personalization to individual needs and contexts. This paper describes a multi-level process evaluation conducted alongside the BetterBrains RCT.

OBJECTIVE

To understand how and why the BetterBrains intervention was effective or ineffective at reducing cognitive decline in healthy adults whilst considering the context in which it was implemented.

METHODS

1,510 non cognitively-deteriorated community-dwelling adults aged 40-70 years old at risk of cognitive decline will be recruited and randomly assigned to the intervention or control group. All BetterBrains intervention participants, coaches, and the research team will be included in the evaluation. A mixed-methods design will be used, guided by The Framework for Implementation Fidelity and the program logic model. Data will be sourced from interviews, focus groups, surveys, BetterBrains coach notes, participant weekly check-in surveys, and audio recordings of intervention coaching sessions. Quantitative data will be analyzed via descriptive and inferential statistics and qualitative data will be analyzed using content and thematic analysis.

RESULTS

The process evaluation will provide information about contextual and influencing factors related to the implementation of BetterBrains and the RCT outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Understanding how BetterBrains was implemented and its associated impacts will inform the translation of the program into community and clinical settings, providing easy access to online, personalized dementia prevention services.

Identifying the factors affecting 'patient engagement' in exercise rehabilitation

Background

Despite the proven benefits of exercise rehabilitation for numerous health conditions, musculoskeletal injuries and recovery from surgery, patient adherence to such programs is reported to often be less than 35%. Increasing patient engagement therefore has the potential to improve patient health outcomes, benefiting the patient, their carers and the services that support them. The aims of this review were to identify the factors that contribute to ‘patient’ engagement in prescribed exercise rehabilitation using the COM-B (capability, opportunity, motivation-behaviour) framework of behavioural analysis.

Methods

Five electronic databases (PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, Web of Science, and ClinicalTrials.gov) were searched. ‘COM-B’ was the key word searched for specifically within titles and abstracts, combined with either ‘physical activity’ OR ‘exercise’ included using the ‘AND’ operation. Records were then filtered and excluded following full-text screening based on the predetermined eligibility criteria.

Results

Twenty studies were included in the review. The main COM-B themes highlighted for improving patient engagement were: capability—improving patient knowledge and cognitive skills for behavioural regulation, such as ‘action planning’ and ‘action control’, which could also benefit time-management; opportunity—a balanced life situation that enabled time to be devoted to the exercise program, social support, easily accessible and affordable resources and services; and motivation—increasing patient levels of self-efficacy and autonomous motivation, which were noted to be influenced by levels of perceived ‘capability’, additionally ‘motivation’ was noted to be influenced by patients perceiving the benefits of the exercise, and adherence to the program was promoted by ‘goal-setting’. Other issues in the ‘capability’ domain included a fear and/or dislike of exercise.

Conclusion

Patient engagement behavior has been shown to be influenced by both external (opportunity) and intrapersonal variables (capability and motivation). Those prescribing exercises within a rehabilitation program need to discuss these factors with their patients and co-design the exercise rehabilitation program in partnership with the patient, since this is likely to improve patient engagement, and thereby result in superior health outcomes. Furthermore, these factors need to be a consideration in clinical trials, if the findings from such trials are to translate into mainstream healthcare settings.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13102-022-00407-3.

The Transmural Trauma Care Model can be implemented well but some barriers and facilitators should be considered during implementation: a mixed methods study

QUESTIONS

What is the reach, dose delivered, dose received and fidelity of the Transmural Trauma Care Model (TTCM)? What are the barriers and facilitators associated with the implementation of the TTCM?

DESIGN

Mixed-methods process evaluation with quantitative evaluation of the extent to which the TTCM was implemented as intended and qualitative evaluation of barriers and facilitators to its implementation.

PARTICIPANTS

Focus group participants included trauma patients, trauma surgeons, hospital-based physiotherapists and primary care network physiotherapists.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Implementation was assessed with reach, dose delivered, dose received and fidelity.

DATA ANALYSIS

A framework method was used to analyse the focus groups and the 'constellation approach' was used to categorise barriers and facilitators into three categories: structure, culture and practice.

RESULTS

The TTCM's reach was 81%, its dose delivered was 99% and 100%, and its dose received was 95% and 96% for the multidisciplinary TTCM consultation hours at the outpatient clinic for trauma patients and the primary care network physiotherapists, respectively. Various fidelity scores ranged from 66 to 93%. Numerous barriers and facilitators associated with the implementation of the TTCM were identified and categorised.

CONCLUSION

This process evaluation showed that the TTCM was largely implemented as intended. Furthermore, various facilitators and barriers were identified that need to be considered when implementing the TTCM more widely. Differences were found among stakeholders but they were generally of the opinion that if the barriers were overcome, the quality of care and patient satisfaction were likely to improve significantly after implementing the TTCM.

REGISTRATION

NTR5474.

An Online, Person-Centered, Risk Factor Management Program to Prevent Cognitive Decline: Protocol for A Prospective Behavior-Modification Blinded Endpoint Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Several modifiable risk factors for dementia have been identified, although the extent to which their modification leads to improved cognitive outcomes remains unclear.

OBJECTIVE

The primary aim is to test the hypothesis that a behavior modification intervention program targeting personalized risk factors prevents cognitive decline in community-dwelling, middle-aged adults with a family history of dementia.

METHODS

This is a prospective, risk factor management, blinded endpoint, randomized, controlled trial, where 1510 cognitively normal, community-dwelling adults aged 40-70 years old will be recruited. Participants will be screened for risk factors related to vascular health (including physical inactivity), mental health, sleep, and cognitive/social engagement. The intervention is an online person-centered risk factor management program: BetterBrains. Participants randomized to intervention will receive telehealth-based person-centered goal setting, motivational interviewing, and follow-up support, health care provider communication and community linkage for management of known modifiable risk factors of dementia. Psychoeducational health information will be provided to both control and intervention groups.

RESULTS

The primary outcome is favorable cognitive performance at 24-months post-baseline, defined as the absence of decline on one or more of the following cognitive tests: (a) Cogstate Detection, (b) Cogstate One Card Learning, (c) Cogstate One Back, and (d) Cognitive Function Instrument total score.

CONCLUSION

We will test the hypothesis that the BetterBrains intervention program can prevent cognitive decline. By leveraging existing community services and using a risk factor management pathway that tailors the intervention to each participant, we maximize likelihood for engagement, long-term adherence, and for preserving cognitive function in at-risk individuals.

Understanding implementation factors and participant experiences of a cluster randomised controlled trial to prevent falls among older Aboriginal people: a process evaluation protocol

INTRODUCTION

Process evaluations examining programme implementation are often conducted in conjunction with effectiveness studies. Their inclusion in studies with Aboriginal participants can give an understanding of programme delivery in Aboriginal community contexts. The Ironbark: Standing Strong and Tall programme was codesigned with Aboriginal communities and includes exercise and facilitated 'yarning' discussion about fall risk and prevention strategies. The programme pilot showed favourable outcomes and acceptability for Aboriginal people aged 45 years and over. The Ironbark: Standing Strong and Tall programme is now being compared with a 'Healthy Community' programme in a cluster randomised controlled trial within Aboriginal health and community services. An embedded process evaluation aims to explore relationships between participation and programme outcomes and the quality of programme implementation.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

The process evaluation will use a mixed methods design, guided by Indigenous research methodology. It will evaluate quantitative data (number of completed sessions, site coaching checklist tool, participant and facilitator questionnaire data and a participant habit formation scale), as well as qualitative data (open-ended responses from project and site staff and semistructured interviews using yarning with study participants and site managers). A programme logic model was developed to explain the intended inputs, activities, outputs and outcomes, which guided this process evaluation design.

CONCLUSION

This process evaluation of a fall prevention programme for older Aboriginal people using a mixed methods design and data triangulation will allow for a comprehensive understanding of study findings. Multiple study sites allow for generalisability of findings and exploration of variation across sites.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ACTRN12619000349145.

Perceptions of falls risk and falls prevention among people with osteoarthritis

PURPOSE

To understand the perceptions of falls risk and falls prevention, and the perceived enablers and barriers to engaging in falls prevention strategies/activities among people with doctor-diagnosed hip and/or knee osteoarthritis.

METHODS

A qualitative study utilising semi-structured telephone interviews. Researchers independently analysed qualitative data using an inductive method guided by the COM-B framework. Interviews were analysed thematically using open, axial, and selective coding. Recruitment ceased at 20 interviews, once data saturation was evident.

RESULTS

Participants were 18 women and two men aged 52-84 years and half had fallen in the last 12 months. Main themes were the absence of recommendations to access activities after having a fall, inconsistencies between perceptions of the relationship between OA and falls, and individual beliefs of not being at risk of falling because of taking precautions. Knowledge about falls prevention programs was limited, the term "falls prevention" was considered stigmatising and only applicable to older frail people. Home modifications were perceived as broadcasting negativity; participants felt falls terminology should be changed from a negative to a positive focus.

CONCLUSIONS

Falls were often seen as inevitable consequence of keeping active. Re-framing the language used to discuss falls is recommended to promote uptake of falls prevention activities.Implications for rehabilitationDespite growing evidence that osteoarthritis (OA) is an independent risk factor for falls, people with OA do not perceive themselves to be at risk and falls prevention is for those who are "old and frail".Re-framing the language used to discuss falls and falls prevention to focus on positive messages may promote the uptake of falls prevention activities in this population.Improving the awareness of falls and falls risk among people with OA through effective health education is needed in order to foster the uptake of, and engagement with, falls prevention activities.

Process evaluation of complex cardiovascular interventions: How to interpret the results of my trial?

Complex interventions of varying degrees of complexity are commonly used and evaluated in cardiovascular nursing and allied professions. Such interventions are increasingly tested using randomized trial designs. However, process evaluations are seldom used to better understand the results of these trials. Process evaluation aims to understand how complex interventions create change by evaluating implementation, mechanisms of impact, and the surrounding context when delivering an intervention. As such, this method can illuminate important mechanisms and clarify variation in results. In this article, process evaluation is described according to the Medical Research Council guidance and its use exemplified through a randomized controlled trial evaluating the effectiveness of a transition program for adolescents with chronic conditions.