Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2015 May 31:16:242.
doi: 10.1186/s13063-015-0755-5.

Explaining high and low performers in complex intervention trials: a new model based on diffusion of innovations theory

Affiliations
Comparative Study

Explaining high and low performers in complex intervention trials: a new model based on diffusion of innovations theory

Heather McMullen et al. Trials. .

Abstract

Background: Complex intervention trials may require health care organisations to implement new service models. In a recent cluster randomised controlled trial, some participating organisations achieved high recruitment, whereas others found it difficult to assimilate the intervention and were low recruiters. We sought to explain this variation and develop a model to inform organisational participation in future complex intervention trials.

Methods: The trial included 40 general practices in a London borough with high HIV prevalence. The intervention was offering a rapid HIV test as part of the New Patient Health Check. The primary outcome was mean CD4 cell count at diagnosis. The process evaluation consisted of several hundred hours of ethnographic observation, 21 semi-structured interviews and analysis of routine documents (e.g., patient leaflets, clinical protocols) and trial documents (e.g., inclusion criteria, recruitment statistics). Qualitative data were analysed thematically using--and, where necessary, extending--Greenhalgh et al.'s model of diffusion of innovations. Narrative synthesis was used to prepare case studies of four practices representing maximum variety in clinicians' interest in HIV (assessed by level of serological testing prior to the trial) and performance in the trial (high vs. low recruiters).

Results: High-recruiting practices were, in general though not invariably, also innovative practices. They were characterised by strong leadership, good managerial relations, readiness for change, a culture of staff training and available staff time ('slack resources'). Their front-line staff believed that patients might benefit from the rapid HIV test ('relative advantage'), were emotionally comfortable administering it ('compatibility'), skilled in performing it ('task issues') and made creative adaptations to embed the test in local working practices ('reinvention'). Early experience of a positive HIV test ('observability') appeared to reinforce staff commitment to recruiting more participants. Low-performing practices typically had less good managerial relations, significant resource constraints, staff discomfort with the test and no positive results early in the trial.

Conclusions: An adaptation of the diffusion of innovations model was an effective analytical tool for retrospectively explaining high and low-performing practices in a complex intervention research trial. Whether the model will work prospectively to predict performance (and hence shape the design of future trials) is unknown.

Trial registration: ISRCTN Registry number: ISRCTN63473710. Date assigned: 22 April 2010.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Greenhalgh et al.’s diffusion of innovation model [23]. Figure taken from article by TG in Milbank Quarterly 2004; 82:595. Reproduced under author’s original copyright transfer agreement

References

    1. Campbell M, Fitzpatrick R, Haines A, Kinmonth AL, Sandercock P, Spiegelhalter D, et al. Framework for design and evaluation of complex interventions to improve health. BMJ. 2000;321:694–6. doi: 10.1136/bmj.321.7262.694. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Craig P, Dieppe P, Macintyre S, Michie S, Nazareth I, Petticrew M. Developing and evaluating complex interventions: the new Medical Research Council guidance. BMJ. 2008;337:a1655. doi: 10.1136/bmj.a1655. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Guise JM, Chang C, Viswanathan M, Glick S, Treadwell J, Umscheid CA, et al. Systematic reviews of complex multicomponent health care interventions. Report No. 14-EHC003-EF. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; 2014. - PubMed
    1. Campbell NC, Murray E, Darbyshire J, Emery J, Farmer A, Griffiths F, et al. Designing and evaluating complex interventions to improve health care. BMJ. 2007;334:455–9. doi: 10.1136/bmj.39108.379965.BE. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Eldridge S, Kerry S. A practical guide to cluster randomised trials in health services research. Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons; 2012.

Publication types

MeSH terms

Associated data