Cargando…

Adapting the determinants of implementation behavior questionnaire to evaluate implementation of a structured low back pain programme using mixed‐methods

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Best‐practice low back pain (LBP) primary care programmes have been developed based on evidence‐based clinical guidelines and implemented in Sweden and Denmark. The theoretical domains framework (TDF) was utilized in the design of the implementation strategy. Based on the TDF do...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ris, Inge, Schröder, Karin, Kongsted, Alice, Abbott, Allan, Nilsen, Per, Hartvigsen, Jan, Öberg, Birgitta
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8020443/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33842696
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/hsr2.266
_version_ 1783674585202294784
author Ris, Inge
Schröder, Karin
Kongsted, Alice
Abbott, Allan
Nilsen, Per
Hartvigsen, Jan
Öberg, Birgitta
author_facet Ris, Inge
Schröder, Karin
Kongsted, Alice
Abbott, Allan
Nilsen, Per
Hartvigsen, Jan
Öberg, Birgitta
author_sort Ris, Inge
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Best‐practice low back pain (LBP) primary care programmes have been developed based on evidence‐based clinical guidelines and implemented in Sweden and Denmark. The theoretical domains framework (TDF) was utilized in the design of the implementation strategy. Based on the TDF domains, the Determinants of Implementation Behavior Questionnaire (DIBQ) has been developed to evaluate implementation determinants, but its feasibility and validity need to be tested and adapted to study specific contexts. This study aimed to tailor the DIBQ for evaluation of implementation for LBP primary care programmes. The objectives were to (a) translate the DIBQ into Swedish and Danish, (b) adapt the DIBQ into DIBQ‐tailored (DIBQ‐t) to study content validity, (c) test the DIBQ‐t for feasibility, and (d) perform validity testing of DIBQ‐t. METHODS: We used a mixed‐methods design. First, forward translation of the DIBQ, then adaptation into DIBQ‐t using qualitative face validity and quantitative content validity was done. Finally, to determine feasibility and construct validity using confirmatory factor analyses, we used data from DIBQ‐t collected after the programmes' 2‐day course. RESULTS: The final DIBQ‐t included 28 items describing 10 of the original 18 DIBQ domains and was considered feasible. A total of 598 clinicians out of 609 responded to the DIBQ‐t, with only 2‰ of the items missing. The confirmatory factor analyses showed a good fit after removing two items with the lowest domain loading. The DIBQ‐t maintained linkage to all domains within the Behavioral Change Wheel. The clinicians' expectations, according to the DIBQ‐t, indicate facilitating determinants outweighing barriers at the initiation of implementation processes. CONCLUSIONS: The study resulted in a feasible and valid version of a questionnaire for evaluating clinicians' expectations regarding implementation determinants of best‐practice LBP primary care programmes.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8020443
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-80204432021-04-08 Adapting the determinants of implementation behavior questionnaire to evaluate implementation of a structured low back pain programme using mixed‐methods Ris, Inge Schröder, Karin Kongsted, Alice Abbott, Allan Nilsen, Per Hartvigsen, Jan Öberg, Birgitta Health Sci Rep Research Articles BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Best‐practice low back pain (LBP) primary care programmes have been developed based on evidence‐based clinical guidelines and implemented in Sweden and Denmark. The theoretical domains framework (TDF) was utilized in the design of the implementation strategy. Based on the TDF domains, the Determinants of Implementation Behavior Questionnaire (DIBQ) has been developed to evaluate implementation determinants, but its feasibility and validity need to be tested and adapted to study specific contexts. This study aimed to tailor the DIBQ for evaluation of implementation for LBP primary care programmes. The objectives were to (a) translate the DIBQ into Swedish and Danish, (b) adapt the DIBQ into DIBQ‐tailored (DIBQ‐t) to study content validity, (c) test the DIBQ‐t for feasibility, and (d) perform validity testing of DIBQ‐t. METHODS: We used a mixed‐methods design. First, forward translation of the DIBQ, then adaptation into DIBQ‐t using qualitative face validity and quantitative content validity was done. Finally, to determine feasibility and construct validity using confirmatory factor analyses, we used data from DIBQ‐t collected after the programmes' 2‐day course. RESULTS: The final DIBQ‐t included 28 items describing 10 of the original 18 DIBQ domains and was considered feasible. A total of 598 clinicians out of 609 responded to the DIBQ‐t, with only 2‰ of the items missing. The confirmatory factor analyses showed a good fit after removing two items with the lowest domain loading. The DIBQ‐t maintained linkage to all domains within the Behavioral Change Wheel. The clinicians' expectations, according to the DIBQ‐t, indicate facilitating determinants outweighing barriers at the initiation of implementation processes. CONCLUSIONS: The study resulted in a feasible and valid version of a questionnaire for evaluating clinicians' expectations regarding implementation determinants of best‐practice LBP primary care programmes. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2021-04-05 /pmc/articles/PMC8020443/ /pubmed/33842696 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/hsr2.266 Text en © 2021 The Authors. Health Science Reports published by Wiley Periodicals LLC. This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.
spellingShingle Research Articles
Ris, Inge
Schröder, Karin
Kongsted, Alice
Abbott, Allan
Nilsen, Per
Hartvigsen, Jan
Öberg, Birgitta
Adapting the determinants of implementation behavior questionnaire to evaluate implementation of a structured low back pain programme using mixed‐methods
title Adapting the determinants of implementation behavior questionnaire to evaluate implementation of a structured low back pain programme using mixed‐methods
title_full Adapting the determinants of implementation behavior questionnaire to evaluate implementation of a structured low back pain programme using mixed‐methods
title_fullStr Adapting the determinants of implementation behavior questionnaire to evaluate implementation of a structured low back pain programme using mixed‐methods
title_full_unstemmed Adapting the determinants of implementation behavior questionnaire to evaluate implementation of a structured low back pain programme using mixed‐methods
title_short Adapting the determinants of implementation behavior questionnaire to evaluate implementation of a structured low back pain programme using mixed‐methods
title_sort adapting the determinants of implementation behavior questionnaire to evaluate implementation of a structured low back pain programme using mixed‐methods
topic Research Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8020443/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33842696
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/hsr2.266
work_keys_str_mv AT risinge adaptingthedeterminantsofimplementationbehaviorquestionnairetoevaluateimplementationofastructuredlowbackpainprogrammeusingmixedmethods
AT schroderkarin adaptingthedeterminantsofimplementationbehaviorquestionnairetoevaluateimplementationofastructuredlowbackpainprogrammeusingmixedmethods
AT kongstedalice adaptingthedeterminantsofimplementationbehaviorquestionnairetoevaluateimplementationofastructuredlowbackpainprogrammeusingmixedmethods
AT abbottallan adaptingthedeterminantsofimplementationbehaviorquestionnairetoevaluateimplementationofastructuredlowbackpainprogrammeusingmixedmethods
AT nilsenper adaptingthedeterminantsofimplementationbehaviorquestionnairetoevaluateimplementationofastructuredlowbackpainprogrammeusingmixedmethods
AT hartvigsenjan adaptingthedeterminantsofimplementationbehaviorquestionnairetoevaluateimplementationofastructuredlowbackpainprogrammeusingmixedmethods
AT obergbirgitta adaptingthedeterminantsofimplementationbehaviorquestionnairetoevaluateimplementationofastructuredlowbackpainprogrammeusingmixedmethods