Peer-support to increase uptake of screening for diabetic retinopathy: process evaluation of the DURE cluster randomized trial
Autor: | Dorothy Mutie, Mathew Kipturgo, Allen Foster, Nyawira Mwangi, Covadonga Bascaran, Stephen Gichuhi, Mark Ng’ang’a, Min Jung Kim, Jacqueline Ramke, Consuela Moorman, Lawrence Muthami |
---|---|
Jazyk: | angličtina |
Rok vydání: | 2020 |
Předmět: |
lcsh:Arctic medicine. Tropical medicine
lcsh:RC955-962 Psychological intervention Context (language use) Peer support Process evaluation law.invention 03 medical and health sciences 0302 clinical medicine Randomized controlled trial Nursing Cluster-randomized clinical trial law Diabetic retinopathy 030212 general & internal medicine Cluster randomised controlled trial 030503 health policy & services Research Diabetes Public Health Environmental and Occupational Health Attendance Focus group Infectious Diseases Consolidated Framework of Implementation Research (CFIR) Implementation research 0305 other medical science Psychology |
Zdroj: | Tropical Medicine and Health Tropical Medicine and Health, Vol 48, Iss 1, Pp 1-17 (2020) |
ISSN: | 1348-8945 |
Popis: | Background There is limited evidence on how implementation of peer support interventions influences effectiveness, particularly for individuals with diabetes. We conducted a cluster randomized controlled trial to compare the effectiveness of a peer-led health education package versus usual care to increase uptake of screening for diabetic retinopathy (DR). Methods Our process evaluation used a mixed-method design to investigate the recruitment and retention, reach, dose, fidelity, acceptability, and context of implementation, and was guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). We reviewed trial documents, conducted semi-structured interviews with key informants (n = 10) and conducted four focus group discussions with participants in both arms of the trial. Three analysts undertook CFIR theory-driven content analysis of the qualitative data. Quantitative data was analyzed to provide descriptive statistics relevant to the objectives of the process evaluation. Results The trial had positive implementation outcomes, 100% retention of clusters and 96% retention for participants, 83% adherence to delivery of content of group talks (fidelity), and 78% attendance (reach) to at least 50% (3/6) of the group talks (dose). The data revealed that intervention characteristics, outer setting, inner setting, individual characteristics, and process (all the constructs of CFIR) influenced the implementation. There were more facilitators than barriers to the implementation. Facilitators included the relative advantage of the intervention compared with current practice (intervention characteristics); awareness of the growing prioritization of diabetes in the national health policy framework (outer setting); tension for change due to the realization of the vulnerability to vision loss from DR (inner setting); a strong collective sense of accountability of peer supporters to implement the intervention (individual characteristics); and regular feedback on the progress with implementation (process). Potential barriers included the need to queue at the eye clinic (intervention characteristic), travel inconveniences (inner setting), and socio-political disruption (outer setting). Conclusions The intervention was implemented with high retention, reach, fidelity, and dose. The CFIR provided a valuable framework for evaluating contextual factors that influenced implementation and helped to understand what adaptations may be needed during scale up. Trial registration Pan African Clinical Trials Registry: PACTR201707002430195 registered 15 July 2017 |
Databáze: | OpenAIRE |
Externí odkaz: |