Ellen Ji van Dongen1, Geerke Duijzer1, Sophia C Jansen2, Josien Ter Beek2, Johanna M Huijg3, Joanne N Leerlooijer1, Gerrit J Hiddink4, Edith Jm Feskens1, Annemien Haveman-Nies1. 1. 1Wageningen University,Division of Human Nutrition and Academic Collaborative Centre AGORA,PO Box 8129,6700 EV Wageningen,The Netherlands. 2. 2GGD Noord- en Oost-Gelderland (Community Health Service),Warnsveld,The Netherlands. 3. 3Leyden Academy on Vitality and Ageing,Leiden,The Netherlands. 4. 4Wageningen University,Strategic Communication,Sub-department Communication,Philosophy and Technology: Centre for Integrative Development,Social Sciences,Wageningen,The Netherlands.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To investigate (i) how the SLIMMER intervention was delivered and received in Dutch primary health care and (ii) how this could explain intervention effectiveness. DESIGN: A randomised controlled trial was conducted and subjects were randomly allocated to the intervention (10-month combined dietary and physical activity intervention) or the control group. A process evaluation including quantitative and qualitative methods was conducted. Data on process indicators (recruitment, reach, dose received, acceptability, implementation integrity and applicability) were collected via semi-structured interviews with health-care professionals (n 45) and intervention participant questionnaires (n 155). SETTING: SLIMMER was implemented in Dutch primary health care in twenty-five general practices, eleven dietitians, nine physiotherapist practices and fifteen sports clubs. SUBJECTS: Subjects at increased risk of developing type 2 diabetes were included. RESULTS: It was possible to recruit the intended high-risk population (response rate 54 %) and the SLIMMER intervention was very well received by both participants and health-care professionals (mean acceptability rating of 82 and 80, respectively). The intervention programme was to a large extent implemented as planned and was applicable in Dutch primary health care. Higher dose received and participant acceptability were related to improved health outcomes and dietary behaviour, but not to physical activity behaviour. CONCLUSIONS: The present study showed that it is feasible to implement a diabetes prevention intervention in Dutch primary health care. Higher dose received and participant acceptability were associated with improved health outcomes and dietary behaviour. Using an extensive process evaluation plan to gain insight into how an intervention is delivered and received is a valuable way of identifying intervention components that contribute to implementation integrity and effective prevention of type 2 diabetes in primary health care.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: To investigate (i) how the SLIMMER intervention was delivered and received in Dutch primary health care and (ii) how this could explain intervention effectiveness. DESIGN: A randomised controlled trial was conducted and subjects were randomly allocated to the intervention (10-month combined dietary and physical activity intervention) or the control group. A process evaluation including quantitative and qualitative methods was conducted. Data on process indicators (recruitment, reach, dose received, acceptability, implementation integrity and applicability) were collected via semi-structured interviews with health-care professionals (n 45) and intervention participant questionnaires (n 155). SETTING:SLIMMER was implemented in Dutch primary health care in twenty-five general practices, eleven dietitians, nine physiotherapist practices and fifteen sports clubs. SUBJECTS: Subjects at increased risk of developing type 2 diabetes were included. RESULTS: It was possible to recruit the intended high-risk population (response rate 54 %) and the SLIMMER intervention was very well received by both participants and health-care professionals (mean acceptability rating of 82 and 80, respectively). The intervention programme was to a large extent implemented as planned and was applicable in Dutch primary health care. Higher dose received and participant acceptability were related to improved health outcomes and dietary behaviour, but not to physical activity behaviour. CONCLUSIONS: The present study showed that it is feasible to implement a diabetes prevention intervention in Dutch primary health care. Higher dose received and participant acceptability were associated with improved health outcomes and dietary behaviour. Using an extensive process evaluation plan to gain insight into how an intervention is delivered and received is a valuable way of identifying intervention components that contribute to implementation integrity and effective prevention of type 2 diabetes in primary health care.
Entities:
Keywords:
Diabetes; Lifestyle intervention; Prevention; Primary health care; Process evaluation; Randomised controlled trial
Authors: N R den Braver; E de Vet; G Duijzer; J Ter Beek; S C Jansen; G J Hiddink; E J M Feskens; A Haveman-Nies Journal: Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act Date: 2017-06-12 Impact factor: 6.457
Authors: Adam Bayley; Daniel Stahl; Mark Ashworth; Derek G Cook; Peter H Whincup; Janet Treasure; Anne Greenough; Katie Ridge; Kirsty Winkley; Khalida Ismail Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2018-09-04 Impact factor: 3.295
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
Authors: Reindolf Anokye; Simone Radavelli-Bagatini; Catherine P Bondonno; Marc Sim; Lauren C Blekkenhorst; Emma Connolly; Nicola P Bondonno; John T Schousboe; Richard Woodman; Kun Zhu; Pawel Szulc; Ben Jackson; James Dimmock; Markus P Schlaich; Kay L Cox; Douglas P Kiel; Wai H Lim; Amanda Devine; Peter L Thompson; Jenny Gianoudis; Belinda De Ross; Robin M Daly; Jonathan M Hodgson; Joshua R Lewis; Mandy Stanley Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2020-11-11 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Jenny Rossen; Maria Hagströmer; Agneta Yngve; Kerstin Brismar; Barbara Ainsworth; Unn-Britt Johansson Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2021-06-22 Impact factor: 3.295