Promoting the implementation of a computer-tailored physical activity intervention: development and feasibility testing of an implementation intervention.

BACKGROUND: Although there are many proven effective physical activity (PA) interventions for older adults, implementation in a real world setting is often limited. This study describes the systematic development of a multifaceted implementation intervention targeting the implementation of an evidence-based computer-tailored PA intervention and evaluates its use and feasibility. METHODS: The implementation intervention was developed following the Intervention Mapping (IM) protocol, supplemented with insights from implementation science literature. The implementation intervention targets the municipal healthcare policy advisors, as an important implementation stakeholder in Dutch healthcare system. The feasibility of the implementation intervention was studied among these stakeholders using a pretest-posttest design within 8 municipal healthcare settings. Quantitative questionnaires were used to assess task performance (i.e. achievement of performance objectives), and utilization of implementation strategies (as part of the intervention). Furthermore, changes in implementation determinants were studied by gathering quantitative data before, during and after applying the implementation intervention within a one-year period. Additionally, semi-structured interviews with stakeholders assessed their considerations regarding the feasibility of the implementation intervention. RESULTS: A multi-faceted implementation intervention was developed in which implementation strategies (e.g. funding, educational materials, meetings, building a coalition) were selected to target the most relevant identified implementation determinants. Most implementation strategies were used as intended. Execution of performance objectives for adoption and implementation was relatively high (75-100%). Maintenance objectives were executed to a lesser degree (13-63%). No positive changes in implementation determinants were found. None of the stakeholders decided to continue implementation of the PA intervention further, mainly due to the unforeseen amount of labour and the disappointing reach of end-users. CONCLUSION: The current study highlights the importance of a thorough feasibility study in addition to the use of IM. Although feasibility results may have demonstrated that stakeholders broadly accepted the implementation intervention, implementation determinants did not change favorably, and stakeholders had no plans to continue the PA intervention. Yet, choices made during the development of the implementation intervention (i.e. the operationalization of Implementation Mapping) might not have been optimal. The current study describes important lessons learned when developing an implementation intervention, and provides recommendations for developers of future implementation interventions.

The efficacy of online physical activity interventions with added mobile elements within adults aged 50 years and over: Randomized controlled trial.

Electronic health (eHealth) and mobile health (mHealth) could stimulate physical activity (PA) in a time-efficient and cost-effective way. This randomized controlled trial aims to investigate effects on moderate-to-vigorous PA (MVPA) of different combined computer- and mobile-based PA interventions targeted at adults aged 50 years and over. Participants (N = 954) were randomly allocated to a basic existing computer-based intervention (Active Plus [AP] or I Move [IM]) supplemented with one of three mobile elements being (1) activity tracker (AT), (2) ecological momentary intervention (EMI), or (3) chatbot (CB) or a control group (CG). MVPA was assessed via the SQUASH at baseline (T0), 3 months (T1), and 6 months (T2) and via accelerometers at T0 and T2. No intervention effects were found on objective (p = .502) and subjective (p = .368) MVPA for main research groups (AP/IM + AT, AP/IM + EMI, AP/IM + CB). Preliminary MVPA findings for subgroups (AP + AT, AP + EMI, AP + CB, IM + AT, IM + EMI, IM + CB) combined with drop-out data showed potential for the computer-based intervention AP with an integrated AT. Based on these preliminary findings, eHealth developers can be recommended to integrate ATs with existing computer-based PA interventions. However, further research is recommended to confirm the findings as a result of the exploratory nature of the subgroup analyses.

Recruitment strategies for reaching adults aged 50 years and older with low socioeconomic status for participation in online physical activity interventions.

Background: Generally, the health condition of those with higher socioeconomic status (SES) is better compared to those with lower SES. The application of appropriate strategies to reach low SES populations with electronic health (eHealth) interventions is thus of major importance to reduce health inequalities. eHealth-studies providing detailed information on recruitment strategies are scarce, despite the fact that this information is crucial for comparable research and implementation. Objective: To provide insight into the reach, sample characteristics and costs of three pre-planned strategies for recruiting adults aged 50 years and older with low SES for participation in an online physical activity intervention, as part of a field study. Methods: Recruitment took place via (1) invitation letters via a municipality, (2) gyms and (3) social media advertisements, aiming to include 400 participants. Additional procedures were followed to reach specifically the low SES group. Response rates, sociodemographic characteristics and costs per strategy were assessed. Results: The highest response was shown for the municipality approach (N = 281), followed by social media (N = 71) and gyms (N = 45). Ten participants were recruited via family/friends. The most low-educated participants were reached via the municipality (N = 128) followed by social media (N = 9), gyms (N = 8) and family/friends (N = 5). Recruitment costs were with €2,142.37 the highest for the municipality compared to €96.81 for social media and no costs for gyms. Conclusions: Recruitment via invitation letters through a municipality has the highest potential for reaching low SES participants of the three applied strategies, although the higher recruitment costs need to be taken into account.

Process and effect evaluation of a referral aid for smoking cessation counselling in primary care: Findings of a randomized controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: This study explored the use and effects of a smoking cessation referral in: 1) practice nurses (PNs), and 2) smokers. The use of evidence-based smoking cessation interventions (EBSCIs) can double the likelihood of a successful smoking cessation attempt. A referral aid was developed to aid Dutch PNs in primary care in deciding which smokers are the most suitable for EBSCI. METHODS: Two different studies were conducted: 1) a randomized controlled trial with a process evaluation (n=82) and effect evaluation (n=285) among smoking patients recruited by PNs (n=73), and 2) a process evaluation among a subgroup of PNs (n=40) from January 2019 to September 2020. RESULTS: Overall, the response in both groups was low. PNs found the referral aid materials clear and understandable. Smokers had similar but (slightly) less-positive opinions. The smokers in both groups did not differ in the amount of discussion and use of EBSCIs, nor on smoking abstinence. CONCLUSIONS: Further research should assess how to better involve PNs and smokers when recruiting for an RCT and how to foster effective counselling. Additional research should also look deeper into barriers to referral of both PNs and smokers, and how to stimulate referral to EBSCIs best and help smokers to make a decision; for example by implementing a simplified strategy both within the primary care setting and outside, by involving other healthcare professionals or options outside healthcare such as the workplace and social domain. Trial registration: The study was registered at the Netherlands Trial Register (NL7020, https://www.trialregister.nl/trial/7020).