Gill Hubbard1, Catharine Ward Thompson2, Robert Locke3, Dan Jenkins4, Sarah-Anne Munoz5, Hugo Van Woerden4, Margaret Maxwell6, Yaling Yang7, Trish Gorely8. 1. Department of Nursing and Midwifery, University of the Highlands and Islands, Centre for Health Science, Old Perth Road, Inverness, IV2 3JH, Scotland, UK. gill.hubbard@uhi.ac.uk. 2. OPENspace research centre, University of Edinburgh, 74 Lauriston Place, Edinburgh, EH3 9DF, UK. 3. Partnerships for Well-Being, 33 Wells Street, Inverness, IV35JU, Scotland. 4. NHS Highland, Larch House, Stoneyfield Business Park, Inverness, IV2 7PA, UK. 5. Division of Rural Health and Well-being, University of the Highlands and Islands, Centre for Health Science, Old Perth Road, Inverness, Scotland, UK, IV2 3JH. 6. Nursing, Midwifery and Allied Health Professions Research Unit, University of Stirling, Stirling, FK9 4LA, Scotland. 7. Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Radcliffe Primary Care Building, Radcliffe Observatory Quarter, Woodstock Road, Oxford, OX2 6GG, UK. 8. Department of Nursing and Midwifery, University of the Highlands and Islands, Centre for Health Science, Old Perth Road, Inverness, IV2 3JH, Scotland, UK.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Interventions need to be developed in a timely and relatively low-cost manner in order to respond to, and quickly address, major public health concerns. We aimed to quickly develop an intervention to support people with severe mental ill-health, that is systematic, well founded both in theory and evidence, without the support of significant funding or resource. In this article we aim to open and elucidate the contents of the 'black box' of intervention development. METHODS: A multidisciplinary team of seven academics and health practitioners, together with service user input, developed an intervention in 2018 by scoping the literature, face-to-face meetings, email and telephone. Researcher fieldnotes were analysed to describe how the intervention was developed in four iterative steps. RESULTS: In step 1 and 2, scoping the literature showed that, a) people with severe mental illness have high mortality risk in part due to high levels of sedentary behaviour and low levels of exercise; b) barriers to being active include mood, stress, body weight, money, lack of programmes and facilities and stigma c) 'nature walks' has potential as an intervention to address the problem. In Step 3, the team agreed what needed to be included in the intervention so it addressed the "five ways to mental wellbeing" i.e., help people to connect, be active, take notice, keep learning and give. The intervention was mapped to key behavioural change concepts such as, personal relevance, relapse prevention, self-efficacy. In Step 4, the team worked out how best to implement the intervention. The intervention would be delivered over 12 weeks by members of the hospital team and community walk volunteers. Participants would receive a nature walks booklet and text messages. CONCLUSIONS: We developed a theoretically-informed, evidence-based nature walks programme in a timely and relatively low-cost manner relevant in an era of growing mental illness and funding austerity. Further research is required to test if the intervention is effective and if this approach to intervention development works.
BACKGROUND: Interventions need to be developed in a timely and relatively low-cost manner in order to respond to, and quickly address, major public health concerns. We aimed to quickly develop an intervention to support people with severe mental ill-health, that is systematic, well founded both in theory and evidence, without the support of significant funding or resource. In this article we aim to open and elucidate the contents of the 'black box' of intervention development. METHODS: A multidisciplinary team of seven academics and health practitioners, together with service user input, developed an intervention in 2018 by scoping the literature, face-to-face meetings, email and telephone. Researcher fieldnotes were analysed to describe how the intervention was developed in four iterative steps. RESULTS: In step 1 and 2, scoping the literature showed that, a) people with severe mental illness have high mortality risk in part due to high levels of sedentary behaviour and low levels of exercise; b) barriers to being active include mood, stress, body weight, money, lack of programmes and facilities and stigma c) 'nature walks' has potential as an intervention to address the problem. In Step 3, the team agreed what needed to be included in the intervention so it addressed the "five ways to mental wellbeing" i.e., help people to connect, be active, take notice, keep learning and give. The intervention was mapped to key behavioural change concepts such as, personal relevance, relapse prevention, self-efficacy. In Step 4, the team worked out how best to implement the intervention. The intervention would be delivered over 12 weeks by members of the hospital team and community walk volunteers. Participants would receive a nature walks booklet and text messages. CONCLUSIONS: We developed a theoretically-informed, evidence-based nature walks programme in a timely and relatively low-cost manner relevant in an era of growing mental illness and funding austerity. Further research is required to test if the intervention is effective and if this approach to intervention development works.
Authors: Helen Smith; Luke Budworth; Chloe Grindey; Isabel Hague; Natalie Hamer; Roman Kislov; Peter van der Graaf; Joe Langley Journal: Health Res Policy Syst Date: 2022-04-02
Authors: Ilkka Väänänen; Sebastià Mas-Alòs; Frank Vandaele; Anna Codina-Nadal; Sergi Matas; Eva Aumatell; Ine De Clerk; Anna Puig-Ribera Journal: Eur J Public Health Date: 2022-08-26 Impact factor: 4.424
Authors: Hannah A Armitt; Ellen N Kingsley; Leah Attwell; Piran C L White; Kat Woolley; Megan Garside; Natasha Green; Michael Hussey; Peter A Coventry Journal: PLoS One Date: 2022-09-20 Impact factor: 3.752