Harriet Koorts1, Samuel Cassar2, Jo Salmon2, Mark Lawrence2, Paul Salmon3, Henry Dorling4. 1. Deakin University, Institute for Physical Activity and Nutrition (IPAN), School of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences, Geelong, VIC, Australia. h.koorts@deakin.edu.au. 2. Deakin University, Institute for Physical Activity and Nutrition (IPAN), School of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences, Geelong, VIC, Australia. 3. Centre for Human Factors and Sociotechnical Systems, Faculty of Arts, Business and Law, University of the Sunshine Coast, Queensland, Australia. 4. Solent University, School of Sport, Health and Social Science, Southampton, Hampshire, UK.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Sustainable shifts in population behaviours require system-level implementation and embeddedness of large-scale health interventions. This paper aims to understand how different contexts of scaling up interventions affect mechanisms to produce intended and unintended scale up outcomes. METHODS: A mixed method study combining a realist perspective and systems analysis (causal loop diagrams) of scaled-up physical activity and/or nutrition interventions implemented at a state/national level in Australia (2010-18). The study involved four distinct phases: Phase 1 expert consultation, database and grey literature searches to identify scaled-up interventions; Phase 2 generating initial Context-Mechanism-Outcome configurations (CMOs) from the WHO ExpandNet framework for scaling up; Phase 3 testing and refining CMOs via online surveys and realist interviews with academics, government and non-government organisations (NGOs) involved in scale up of selected interventions (Phase 1); and Phase 4 generating cross-case mid-range theories represented in systems models of scaling up; validated by member checking. Descriptive statistics were reported for online survey data and realist analysis for interview data. RESULTS: Seven interventions were analysed, targeting nutrition (n = 1), physical activity (n = 1), or a combination (n = 5). Twenty-six participants completed surveys; 19 completed interviews. Sixty-three CMO pathways underpinned successful scale up, reflecting 36 scale up contexts, 8 key outcomes; linked via 53 commonly occurring mechanisms. All five WHO framework domains were represented in the systems models. Most CMO pathways included 'intervention attributes' and led to outcomes 'community sustainability/embeddedness' and 'stakeholder buy-in/perceived value'. Irrespective of interventions being scaled in similar contexts (e.g., having political favourability); mechanisms still led to both intended and unintended scale up outcomes (e.g., increased or reduced sustainability). CONCLUSION: This paper provides the first evidence for mechanisms underpinning outcomes required for successful scale up of state or nationally delivered interventions. Our findings challenge current prerequisites for effective scaling suggesting other conditions may be necessary. Future scale up approaches that plan for complexity and encourage iterative adaptation throughout, may enhance scale up outcomes. Current linear, context-to-outcome depictions of scale up oversimplify what is a clearly a complex interaction between perceptions, worldviews and goals of those involved. Mechanisms identified in this study could potentially be leveraged during future scale up efforts, to positively influence intervention scalability and sustainability.
BACKGROUND: Sustainable shifts in population behaviours require system-level implementation and embeddedness of large-scale health interventions. This paper aims to understand how different contexts of scaling up interventions affect mechanisms to produce intended and unintended scale up outcomes. METHODS: A mixed method study combining a realist perspective and systems analysis (causal loop diagrams) of scaled-up physical activity and/or nutrition interventions implemented at a state/national level in Australia (2010-18). The study involved four distinct phases: Phase 1 expert consultation, database and grey literature searches to identify scaled-up interventions; Phase 2 generating initial Context-Mechanism-Outcome configurations (CMOs) from the WHO ExpandNet framework for scaling up; Phase 3 testing and refining CMOs via online surveys and realist interviews with academics, government and non-government organisations (NGOs) involved in scale up of selected interventions (Phase 1); and Phase 4 generating cross-case mid-range theories represented in systems models of scaling up; validated by member checking. Descriptive statistics were reported for online survey data and realist analysis for interview data. RESULTS: Seven interventions were analysed, targeting nutrition (n = 1), physical activity (n = 1), or a combination (n = 5). Twenty-six participants completed surveys; 19 completed interviews. Sixty-three CMO pathways underpinned successful scale up, reflecting 36 scale up contexts, 8 key outcomes; linked via 53 commonly occurring mechanisms. All five WHO framework domains were represented in the systems models. Most CMO pathways included 'intervention attributes' and led to outcomes 'community sustainability/embeddedness' and 'stakeholder buy-in/perceived value'. Irrespective of interventions being scaled in similar contexts (e.g., having political favourability); mechanisms still led to both intended and unintended scale up outcomes (e.g., increased or reduced sustainability). CONCLUSION: This paper provides the first evidence for mechanisms underpinning outcomes required for successful scale up of state or nationally delivered interventions. Our findings challenge current prerequisites for effective scaling suggesting other conditions may be necessary. Future scale up approaches that plan for complexity and encourage iterative adaptation throughout, may enhance scale up outcomes. Current linear, context-to-outcome depictions of scale up oversimplify what is a clearly a complex interaction between perceptions, worldviews and goals of those involved. Mechanisms identified in this study could potentially be leveraged during future scale up efforts, to positively influence intervention scalability and sustainability.
Authors: S L Booth; J F Sallis; C Ritenbaugh; J O Hill; L L Birch; L D Frank; K Glanz; D A Himmelgreen; M Mudd; B M Popkin; K A Rickard; S St Jeor; N P Hays Journal: Nutr Rev Date: 2001-03 Impact factor: 7.110
Authors: Rodrigo S Reis; Deborah Salvo; David Ogilvie; Estelle V Lambert; Shifalika Goenka; Ross C Brownson Journal: Lancet Date: 2016-07-28 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Rachel Sutherland; Elizabeth Campbell; David R Lubans; Philip J Morgan; Anthony D Okely; Nicole Nathan; Luke Wolfenden; Jarrod Wiese; Karen Gillham; Jenna Hollis; John Wiggers Journal: Br J Sports Med Date: 2015-09-10 Impact factor: 13.800
Authors: Debbie L Croyden; Helen A Vidgen; Emma Esdaile; Emely Hernandez; Anthea Magarey; Carly J Moores; Lynne Daniels Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2018-03-13 Impact factor: 3.295
Authors: Debra Welsby; Binh Nguyen; Blythe J O'Hara; Christine Innes-Hughes; Adrian Bauman; Louise L Hardy Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2014-02-10 Impact factor: 3.295
Authors: Samuel Cassar; Jo Salmon; Anna Timperio; Patti-Jean Naylor; Femke van Nassau; Ana María Contardo Ayala; Harriet Koorts Journal: Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act Date: 2019-12-02 Impact factor: 6.457
Authors: Harriet Koorts; Paul M Salmon; Christopher T V Swain; Samuel Cassar; David Strickland; Jo Salmon Journal: Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act Date: 2022-05-12 Impact factor: 8.915
Authors: Michael W Beets; Lauren von Klinggraeff; Sarah Burkart; Alexis Jones; John P A Ioannidis; R Glenn Weaver; Anthony D Okely; David Lubans; Esther van Sluijs; Russell Jago; Gabrielle Turner-McGrievy; James Thrasher; Xiaoming Li Journal: Obes Rev Date: 2021-11-14 Impact factor: 10.867
Authors: Kylie D Hesketh; Katherine L Downing; Barbara C Galland; Jan M Nicholson; Rachael Taylor; Liliana Orellana; Mohamed Abdelrazek; Harriet Koorts; Victoria Brown; Jess Haines; Karen J Campbell; Lisa M Barnett; Marie Löf; Marj Moodie; Valerie Carson; Jo Salmon Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2022-03-28 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Philipp Weber; Leonie Birkholz; Simone Kohler; Natalie Helsper; Lea Dippon; Alfred Ruetten; Klaus Pfeifer; Jana Semrau Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-04-14 Impact factor: 4.614