Author:
Salm Sandra,Cecon Natalia,Jenniches Imke,Pfaff Holger,Scholten Nadine,Dresen Antje,Krieger Theresia
Abstract
AbstractBackgroundEvaluating the development phase of a complex intervention programme can be challenging. A prospective evaluation approach is presented based on the example of the new complex psycho-oncological care programme isPO (integrated, cross-sectoral Psycho-Oncology). Prior to programme implementation, we examined (1) if isPO was developed as intended, and (2) if it was relevant and transferable into the newly developed psycho-oncological care networks in North-Rhine Westphalia, Germany. Further, we investigated which implementation facilitators and barriers were anticipated and which implementation strategies were planned by the programme designers (multidisciplinary professionals and cancer supporting organizations who developed the isPO programme components and the networks).MethodsA mixed-methods approach was applied. Qualitative data were collected by quarterly progress reports, interviews and a focus group with the programme designers. Evaluation criteria for document analyses of the quarterly progress reports were developed and applied. Content analysis was applied for analysing interviews and focus group. Quantitative data were gained from evaluating the programme training for the isPO service providers by short written questionnaires that were analysed descriptively.ResultsAn implementable prototype of the isPO programme has been developed within 15 months, however no piloting was conducted. The programme’s complexity proved to be challenging with regard to coordination and communication of the numerous programme designers. This was intensified by existing interdependencies between the designers. Further, there was little communication and participation between the programme designers and the prospective users (patients and service providers). Due to these challenges, only context-unspecific implementation strategies were planned.ConclusionThe required resources for developing a new complex care programme and the need of a mature implementation strategy should be sufficiently addressed. Programmes may benefit from prospective evaluation by gaining insightful knowledge concerning the programme’s maturity and anticipating implementation facilitators and barriers. A mixed-methods evaluation design was crucial for achieving profound insight into the development process.Trial registrationThe study has been registered in the German Clinical Trials Register (No.DRKS00015326) on 30.10.2018.
Funder
Universitätsklinikum Köln
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference50 articles.
1. Global Cancer Observatory. All cancers: Source: Globocan 2020. 2020. https://gco.iarc.fr/today/data/factsheets/cancers/39-All-cancers-factsheet.pdf. Accessed 19 Oct 2021.
2. Mehnert A, Hartung TJ, Friedrich M, Vehling S, Brähler E, Härter M, et al. One in two cancer patients is significantly distressed: Prevalence and indicators of distress. Psychooncology. 2018;27:75–82. https://doi.org/10.1002/pon.4464.
3. Zabora J, BrintzenhofeSzoc K, Curbow B, Hooker C, Piantadosi S. The prevalence of psychological distress by cancer site. Psychooncology. 2001;10:19–28. https://doi.org/10.1002/1099-1611(200101/02)10:1%3c19::AID-PON501%3e3.0.CO;2-6.
4. Gidron Y, Ronson A. Psychosocial factors, biological mediators, and cancer prognosis: a new look at an old story. Curr Opin Oncol. 2008;20:386–92. https://doi.org/10.1097/CCO.0b013e3282fbcd0d.
5. Holland JC. Psycho-oncology. 2nd ed. New York: Oxford University Press; 2010.
Cited by
3 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献