Literature DB >> 26518108

Process evaluation of physical activity counselling with and without the use of mobile technology: A mixed methods study.

R Verwey1, S van der Weegen2, M Spreeuwenberg3, H Tange4, T van der Weijden4, L de Witte5.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: A monitoring-and-feedback tool was developed to stimulate physical activity by giving feedback on physical activity performance to patients and practice nurses. The tool consists of an activity monitor (accelerometer), wirelessly connected to a Smartphone and a web application. Use of this tool is combined with a behaviour change counselling protocol (the Self-management Support Programme) based on the Five A's model (Assess-Advise-Agree-Assist-Arrange).
OBJECTIVES: To examine the reach, implementation and satisfaction with the counselling protocol and the tool.
DESIGN: A process evaluation was conducted in two intervention groups of a three-armed cluster randomised controlled trial, in which the counselling protocol was evaluated with (group 1, n=65) and without (group 2, n=66) the use of the tool using a mixed methods design. SETTINGS: Sixteen family practices in the South of the Netherlands. PARTICIPANTS: Practice nurses (n=20) and their associated physically inactive patients (n=131), diagnosed with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease or Type 2 Diabetes, aged between 40 and 70 years old, and having access to a computer with an Internet connection.
METHODS: Semi structured interviews about the receipt of the intervention were conducted with the nurses and log files were kept regarding the consultations. After the intervention, questionnaires were presented to patients and nurses regarding compliance to and satisfaction with the interventions. Functioning and use of the tool were also evaluated by system and helpdesk logging.
RESULTS: Eighty-six percent of patients (group 1: n=57 and group 2: n=56) and 90% of nurses (group 1: n=10 and group 2: n=9) responded to the questionnaires. The execution of the Self-management Support Programme was adequate; in 83% (group 1: n=52, group 2: n=57) of the patients, the number and planning of the consultations were carried out as intended. Eighty-eight percent (n=50) of the patients in group 1 used the tool until the end of the intervention period. Technical problems occurred in 58% (n=33). Participants from group 1 were significantly more positive: patients: χ(2)(2, N=113)=11.17, p=0.004, and nurses: χ(2)(2, N=19)=6.37, p=0.040. Use of the tool led to greater awareness of the importance of physical activity, more discipline in carrying it out and more enjoyment.
CONCLUSIONS: The interventions were adequately executed and received as planned. Patients from both groups appreciated the focus on physical activity and personal attention given by the nurse. The most appreciated aspect of the combined intervention was the tool, although technical problems frequently occurred. Patients with the tool estimated more improvement of physical activity than patients without the tool.
Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Behaviour change; Motor activity; Physical activity counselling; Primary care nursing; Process evaluation; Remote sensing technology; Self-management support

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26518108     DOI: 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2015.10.008

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Nurs Stud        ISSN: 0020-7489            Impact factor:   5.837


  12 in total

1.  Process evaluation of a tailored intervention programme of cardiovascular risk management in general practices.

Authors:  E Huntink; M Wensing; I M Timmers; J van Lieshout
Journal:  Implement Sci       Date:  2016-12-15       Impact factor: 7.327

2.  The feasibility and RE-AIM evaluation of the TAME health pilot study.

Authors:  Zakkoyya H Lewis; Kenneth J Ottenbacher; Steve R Fisher; Kristofer Jennings; Arleen F Brown; Maria C Swartz; Eloisa Martinez; Elizabeth J Lyons
Journal:  Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act       Date:  2017-08-14       Impact factor: 6.457

Review 3.  Evaluating the Impact of Physical Activity Apps and Wearables: Interdisciplinary Review.

Authors:  Claire McCallum; John Rooksby; Cindy M Gray
Journal:  JMIR Mhealth Uhealth       Date:  2018-03-23       Impact factor: 4.773

4.  Perceptions of Patients With Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease and Their Physiotherapists Regarding the Use of an eHealth Intervention.

Authors:  Sigrid Vorrink; Chantal Huisman; Helianthe Kort; Thierry Troosters; Jan-Willem Lammers
Journal:  JMIR Hum Factors       Date:  2017-09-19

5.  Acceptability and Feasibility of Implementing Accelorometry-Based Activity Monitors and a Linked Web Portal in an Exercise Referral Scheme: Feasibility Randomized Controlled Trial.

Authors:  Jemma Hawkins; Joanna M Charles; Michelle Edwards; Britt Hallingberg; Linda McConnon; Rhiannon Tudor Edwards; Russell Jago; Mark Kelson; Kelly Morgan; Simon Murphy; Emily J Oliver; Sharon A Simpson; Graham Moore
Journal:  J Med Internet Res       Date:  2019-03-29       Impact factor: 5.428

6.  Patients' experiences with a behaviour change intervention to enhance physical activity in primary care: A mixed methods study.

Authors:  Heleen Westland; Jill Sluiter; Sophie Te Dorsthorst; Carin D Schröder; Jaap C A Trappenburg; Sigrid C J M Vervoort; Marieke J Schuurmans
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-02-12       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  Electronic Health Program to Empower Patients in Returning to Normal Activities After Colorectal Surgical Procedures: Mixed-Methods Process Evaluation Alongside a Randomized Controlled Trial.

Authors:  Chantal M den Bakker; Judith Af Huirne; Frederieke G Schaafsma; Charlotte de Geus; Hendrik J Bonjer; Johannes R Anema
Journal:  J Med Internet Res       Date:  2019-01-29       Impact factor: 5.428

8.  Scoping Review of Healthcare Literature on Mobile, Wearable, and Textile Sensing Technology for Continuous Monitoring.

Authors:  N Hernandez; L Castro; J Medina-Quero; J Favela; L Michan; W Ben Mortenson
Journal:  J Healthc Inform Res       Date:  2021-02-01

9.  Primary Health Care Providers' Perspectives on Developing an eHealth Tool for Physical Activity Counselling: A Qualitative Study.

Authors:  Apichai Wattanapisit; Sanhapan Wattanapisit; Titiporn Tuangratananon; Waluka Amaek; Sunton Wongsiri; Prachyapan Petchuay
Journal:  J Multidiscip Healthc       Date:  2021-02-10

10.  A systematic review of the use and reporting of evaluation frameworks within evaluations of physical activity interventions.

Authors:  Judith F Fynn; Wendy Hardeman; Karen Milton; Joseph Murphy; Andy Jones
Journal:  Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act       Date:  2020-08-24       Impact factor: 6.457

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.