Now showing 1 - 3 of 3
- PublicationAdapting health interventions for local fit when scaling-up: A realist review protocolIntroduction: Scaling-up is essential to ensure universal access of effective health interventions. Scaling-up is a complex process, which occurs across diverse systems and contexts with no one-size-fits-all approach. To date, little attention has been paid to the process of scaling-up in how to make adaptations for local fit. The aim of this research is to develop theory on what actions can be used to make adaptations to health interventions for local fit when scaling-up across diverse contexts that will have practical application for implementers involved in scaling-up. Methods and analysis: Given the complexity of this subject, a realist review methodology was selected. Specifically, realist review emphasises an iterative, non-linear process, whereby the review is refined as it progresses. The identification of how the context may activate mechanisms to achieve outcomes is used to generate theories on what works for whom in what circumstances. This protocol will describe the first completed stage of development of an initial programme theory framework, which identified potential actions, contexts, mechanisms and outcomes that could be used to make adaptations when scaling-up. It will then outline the methods for future stages of the review which will focus on identifying case examples of scale-up and adaptation in practice. This realist review consists of six stages: (i) clarifying scope and development of a theoretical framework, (ii) developing a search strategy, (iii) selection and appraisal, (iv) data extraction, (v) data synthesis and analysis and (vi) further theory refinement with stakeholders. Ethics and dissemination: This review will develop theory on how adaptations can be made when scaling-up. Findings will be disseminated in a peer-reviewed journal and through stakeholder engagement as part of the research process. Ethical approval has been received through Health Policy and Management/Centre for Global Health Research Ethics Committee of Trinity College Dublin.
Scopus© Citations 30 452
- PublicationAn Exploration of Performance Management Processes used within Olympic Sport ProgrammesThe organizational environment and role delivery of support personnel have been identified as increasingly important to elite athletes’ preparation for, and performance at, pinnacle competitions. As a result, performance management has been identified as a salient research topic within the field of organizational sport psychology. The purpose of this study was to identify the performance management processes used within Olympic sport programmes and explore how these processes interact in an organizational context. Thirteen participants working in senior positions within Olympic sport organizations (e.g., national performance director) across a range of countries were interviewed. Thematic analysis identified performance management processes existing across strategic, operational, and individual levels in Olympic sport programmes. The findings also suggested that these socially dynamic processes are interrelated and influenced by the delivery of the performance leader’s role. A preliminary conceptual framework was developed to highlight these processes and illustrate their interrelated nature. Overall, the findings advance our knowledge and understanding of performance management as an organizational concept within elite sport. Practical implications are provided for sport psychology practitioners to assess and optimize how performance management processes are used within elite sport programmes.
Scopus© Citations 4 92
- PublicationFeasibility cluster randomised controlled trial evaluating a theory-driven group-based complex intervention versus usual physiotherapy to support self-management of osteoarthritis and low back pain (SOLAS)Background: The self-management of osteoarthritis (OA) and low back pain (LBP) through activity and skills (SOLAS) theory-driven group-based complex intervention was developed primarily for the evaluation of its acceptability to patients and physiotherapists and the feasibility of trial procedures, to inform the potential for a definitive trial. Methods: This assessor-blinded multicentre two-arm parallel cluster randomised controlled feasibility trial compared the SOLAS intervention to usual individual physiotherapy (UP; pragmatic control group). Patients with OA of the hip, knee, lumbar spine and/or chronic LBP were recruited in primary care physiotherapy clinics (i.e. clusters) in Dublin, Ireland, between September 2014 and November 2015. The primary feasibility objectives were evaluated using quantitative methods and individual telephone interviews with purposive samples of participants and physiotherapists. A range of secondary outcomes were collected at baseline, 6 weeks (behaviour change only), 2 months and 6 months to explore the preliminary effects of the intervention. Analysis was by intention-to-treat according to participants' cluster allocation and involved descriptive analysis of the quantitative data and inductive thematic analysis of the qualitative interviews. A linear mixed model was used to contrast change over time in participant secondary outcomes between treatment arms, while adjusting for study waves and clusters. Results: Fourteen clusters were recruited (7 per trial arm), each cluster participated in two waves of recruitment, with the average cluster size below the target of six participants (intervention: mean (SD) = 4.92 (1.31), range 2-7; UP: mean (SD) = 5.08 (2.43), range 1-9). One hundred twenty participants (83.3% of n = 144 expected) were recruited (intervention n = 59; UP n = 61), with follow-up data obtained from 80.8% (n = 97) at 6 weeks, 84.2% (n = 101) at 2 months and 71.7% (n = 86) at 6 months. Most participants received treatment as allocated (intervention n = 49; UP n = 54). The qualitative interviews (12 participants; 10 physiotherapists (PTs) found the intervention and trial procedures acceptable and appropriate, with minimal feasible adaptations required. Linear mixed methods showed improvements in most secondary outcomes at 2 and 6 months with small between-group effects. Conclusions: While the SOLAS intervention and trial procedures were acceptable to participants and PTs, the recruitment of enough participants is the biggest obstacle to a definitive trial.
Scopus© Citations 7 80