Process evaluation of the Cancer Home-Life Intervention: What can we learn from it for future intervention studies?

Autor:	la Cour K; REHPA, The Danish Knowledge Centre for Rehabilitation and Palliative Care, Odense University Hospital and University of Southern Denmark, Nyborg, Denmark., Gregersen Oestergaard L; DEFACTUM, Central Denmark Region, Aarhus, Denmark.; Department of Physiotherapy and Occupational Therapy, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark.; Department of Public Health, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark.; The Research Initiative of Activity Studies and Occupational Therapy, Research Unit of General Practice, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark., Brandt Å; The Research Initiative of Activity Studies and Occupational Therapy, Research Unit of General Practice, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark., Offersen SMH; Research Unit for General Practice, Research Centre for Cancer Diagnosis in Primary Care, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark., Lindahl-Jacobsen L; The Research Initiative of Activity Studies and Occupational Therapy, Research Unit of General Practice, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark.; University College Absalon, Center for Nutrition and Rehabilitation, Sorø, Denmark., Cutchin M; Department of Health Care Sciences, Wayne State University, Detroit, MI, USA., Pilegaard MS; REHPA, The Danish Knowledge Centre for Rehabilitation and Palliative Care, Odense University Hospital and University of Southern Denmark, Nyborg, Denmark.; The Research Initiative of Activity Studies and Occupational Therapy, Research Unit of General Practice, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark.
Jazyk:	angličtina
Zdroj:	Palliative medicine [Palliat Med] 2020 Dec; Vol. 34 (10), pp. 1425-1435. Date of Electronic Publication: 2020 Jul 02.
DOI:	10.1177/0269216320939227
Abstrakt:	Background: The Cancer Home-Life Intervention showed no significant effects, and examination of the processes affecting or inhibiting outcomes is relevant. Aim: To evaluate the Cancer Home-Life Intervention for its processes of implementation, mechanisms of impact and contextual factors. Design: Process evaluation conducted alongside the randomised controlled trial, using quantitative and qualitative methods (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02356627). The Cancer Home-Life Intervention is a tailored, occupational therapy-based programme. Setting/participants: This study took place in participants' homes and at hospital. A total of 113 home-dwelling adults (⩾18 years) with advanced cancer who had received the Cancer Home-Life Intervention were included, together with five intervention-therapists. Results: All 113 participants (100%) received a first home visit; 32 participants (26%) received a second visit; and 4 participants (3%) received a third visit. Median number of delivered intervention components were 3 (interquartile range: 2; 4). Identified barriers for effect included unclear decision process for intervention dosage; participants' low expectations; participants' lack of energy; and insufficient time to adopt new strategies. The trial design constituted a barrier as the intervention could only be provided within a specific short period of time and not when relevant. Intervention components working to solve practical everyday problems, enhance enjoyment and increase a sense of safety were perceived as useful. Conclusion: Future interventions can benefit from inclusion criteria closely related to the intervention focus and clear procedures for when to continue, follow-up and terminate intervention. Decisions about dose and timing may benefit from learning theory by taking into account the time and practice needed to acquire new skills.
Databáze:	MEDLINE
Externí odkaz:	Zobrazit plný text záznamu