Fabiana Lorencatto1, Robert West2, Carla Bruguera2, Susan Michie3. 1. Division of Health Services Research & Management, School of Health Sciences, City University London. 2. CRUK Health Behaviour Research Centre, Department of Epidemiology & Public Health, University College London. 3. Centre for Outcomes Research and Effectiveness, Department of Clinical Educational & Health Psychology, University College London.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Behavioral support for smoking cessation is delivered through different modalities, often guided by treatment manuals. Recently developed methods for assessing fidelity of delivery have shown that face-to-face behavioral support is often not delivered as specified in the service treatment manual. This study aimed to extend this method to evaluate fidelity of telephone-delivered behavioral support. METHOD: A treatment manual and transcripts of 75 audio-recorded behavioral support sessions were obtained from the United Kingdom's national Quitline service and coded into component behavior change techniques (BCTs) using a taxonomy of 45 smoking cessation BCTs. Interrater reliability was assessed using percentage agreement. Fidelity was assessed by comparing the number of BCTs identified in the manual with those delivered in telephone sessions by 4 counselors. Fidelity was assessed according to session type, duration, counselor, and BCT. Differences between self-reported and actual BCT use were examined. RESULTS: Average coding reliability was high (81%). On average, 41.8% of manual-specified BCTs were delivered per session (SD = 16.2), with fidelity varying by counselor from 32% to 49%. Fidelity was highest in pre-quit sessions (46%) and for BCT "give options for additional support" (95%). Fidelity was lowest for quit-day sessions (35%) and BCT "set graded tasks" (0%). Session duration was positively correlated with fidelity (r = .585; p < .01). Significantly fewer BCTs were used than were reported as being used, t(15) = -5.52, p < .001. CONCLUSIONS: The content of telephone-delivered behavioral support can be reliably coded in terms of BCTs. This can be used to assess fidelity to treatment manuals and to in turn identify training needs. The observed low fidelity underlines the need to establish routine procedures for monitoring delivery of behavioral support. PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2014 APA, all rights reserved.
OBJECTIVES: Behavioral support for smoking cessation is delivered through different modalities, often guided by treatment manuals. Recently developed methods for assessing fidelity of delivery have shown that face-to-face behavioral support is often not delivered as specified in the service treatment manual. This study aimed to extend this method to evaluate fidelity of telephone-delivered behavioral support. METHOD: A treatment manual and transcripts of 75 audio-recorded behavioral support sessions were obtained from the United Kingdom's national Quitline service and coded into component behavior change techniques (BCTs) using a taxonomy of 45 smoking cessation BCTs. Interrater reliability was assessed using percentage agreement. Fidelity was assessed by comparing the number of BCTs identified in the manual with those delivered in telephone sessions by 4 counselors. Fidelity was assessed according to session type, duration, counselor, and BCT. Differences between self-reported and actual BCT use were examined. RESULTS: Average coding reliability was high (81%). On average, 41.8% of manual-specified BCTs were delivered per session (SD = 16.2), with fidelity varying by counselor from 32% to 49%. Fidelity was highest in pre-quit sessions (46%) and for BCT "give options for additional support" (95%). Fidelity was lowest for quit-day sessions (35%) and BCT "set graded tasks" (0%). Session duration was positively correlated with fidelity (r = .585; p < .01). Significantly fewer BCTs were used than were reported as being used, t(15) = -5.52, p < .001. CONCLUSIONS: The content of telephone-delivered behavioral support can be reliably coded in terms of BCTs. This can be used to assess fidelity to treatment manuals and to in turn identify training needs. The observed low fidelity underlines the need to establish routine procedures for monitoring delivery of behavioral support. PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2014 APA, all rights reserved.
Authors: Deborah F Tate; Leslie A Lytle; Nancy E Sherwood; Debra Haire-Joshu; Donna Matheson; Shirley M Moore; Catherine M Loria; Charlotte Pratt; Dianne S Ward; Steven H Belle; Susan Michie Journal: Transl Behav Med Date: 2016-06 Impact factor: 3.046
Authors: Meghan M JaKa; Simone A French; Julian Wolfson; Robert W Jeffery; Fabianna Lorencatto; Susan Michie; Shelby L Langer; Rona L Levy; Nancy E Sherwood Journal: J Behav Med Date: 2017-03-28
Authors: Lauren Weston; Sarah Rybczynska-Bunt; Cath Quinn; Charlotte Lennox; Mike Maguire; Mark Pearson; Alex Stirzaker; Graham Durcan; Caroline Stevenson; Jonathan Graham; Lauren Carroll; Rebecca Greer; Mark Haddad; Rachael Hunter; Rob Anderson; Roxanne Todd; Sara Goodier; Sarah Brand; Susan Michie; Tim Kirkpatrick; Sarah Leonard; Tirril Harris; William Henley; Jenny Shaw; Christabel Owens; Richard Byng Journal: PLoS One Date: 2022-07-14 Impact factor: 3.752
Authors: Lisa McDaid; Ross Thomson; Joanne Emery; Tim Coleman; Sue Cooper; Lucy Phillips; Felix Naughton Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2021-04-28 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Meghan M JaKa; Caroline Wood; Sara Veblen-Mortenson; Shirley M Moore; Donna Matheson; June Stevens; Lou Atkins; Susan Michie; Clara Adegbite-Adeniyi; Oluwatomisin Olayinka; Eli K Po'e; Alethea M Kelly; Holly Nicastro; Shrikant I Bangdiwala; Shari L Barkin; Charlotte Pratt; Thomas N Robinson; Nancy E Sherwood Journal: West J Nurs Res Date: 2020-09-10 Impact factor: 1.774
Authors: Simon D French; Sally E Green; Jill J Francis; Rachelle Buchbinder; Denise A O'Connor; Jeremy M Grimshaw; Susan Michie Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2015-07-08 Impact factor: 2.692