Cargando…

How is the Behavior Change Technique Content of the NHS Diabetes Prevention Program Understood by Participants? A Qualitative Study of Fidelity, With a Focus on Receipt

BACKGROUND: The National Health Service (NHS) Diabetes Prevention Program (DPP) is a nationally implemented behavioral intervention for adults at high risk of developing Type 2 diabetes in England, based on a program specification that stipulates inclusion of 19 specific behavior change techniques (...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Miles, Lisa M, Hawkes, Rhiannon E, French, David P
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Oxford University Press 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9274983/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34788358
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/abm/kaab093
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: The National Health Service (NHS) Diabetes Prevention Program (DPP) is a nationally implemented behavioral intervention for adults at high risk of developing Type 2 diabetes in England, based on a program specification that stipulates inclusion of 19 specific behavior change techniques (BCTs). Previous work has identified drift in fidelity from these NHS England specifications through providers’ program manuals, training, and delivery, especially in relation to BCTs targeting self-regulatory processes. PURPOSE: This qualitative study investigates intervention receipt, i.e., how the self-regulatory BCT content of the NHS-DPP is understood by participants. METHODS: Twenty participants from eight NHS-DPP locations were interviewed; topics included participants’ understanding of self-monitoring of behavior, goal setting, feedback, problem solving, and action planning. Transcripts were analyzed thematically using the framework method. RESULTS: There was a wide variation in understanding among participants for some BCTs, as well as between BCTs. Participants described their understanding of “self-monitoring of behaviors” with ease and valued BCTs focused on outcomes (weight loss). Some participants learned how to set appropriate behavioral goals. Participants struggled to recall “action planning” or “problem solving” or found these techniques challenging to understand, unless additional support was provided (e.g., through group discussion). CONCLUSIONS: Participants’ lack of understanding of some self-regulatory BCTs is consistent with the drift across fidelity domains previously identified from NHS design specifications. Behavioral interventions should build-in necessary support for participants to help them understand some BCTs such as action planning and problem solving. Alternatively, these self-regulatory BCTs may be intrinsically difficult to use for this population.