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
Multicenter Study
. 2017 Feb 17;18(1):24.
doi: 10.1186/s12875-017-0585-5.

Feasibility of an implementation strategy for the integration of health promotion in routine primary care: a quantitative process evaluation

Alvaro Sanchez  1 , Gonzalo Grandes  2 , Josep M Cortada  3 , Haizea Pombo  1 , Catalina Martinez  1 , Mary Helen Corrales  4 , Enrique de la Peña  5 , Justo Mugica  6 , Esther Gorostiza  7 ; PVS group
Affiliations
Multicenter Study

Feasibility of an implementation strategy for the integration of health promotion in routine primary care: a quantitative process evaluation

Alvaro Sanchez et al. BMC Fam Pract. .

Abstract

Background: Process evaluation is recommended to improve the understanding of underlying mechanisms related to clinicians, patients, context and intervention delivery that may impact on trial or program results, feasibility and transferability to practice. The aim of this study was to assess the feasibility of the Prescribe Healthy Life (PVS from the Spanish "Prescribe Vida Saludable") implementation strategy for enhancing the adoption and implementation of an evidence-based health promotion intervention in primary health care.

Methods: A descriptive study of 2-year implementation indicators for the PVS clinical intervention was conducted in four primary health care centers. A multifaceted collaborative modeling implementation strategy was developed to enhance the integration of a clinical intervention to promote healthy lifestyles into clinical practice. Process indicators were assessed for intervention reach, adoption, implementation, sustainability and their variability at center, practice, and patient levels.

Results: Mean rates of adoption by means of active collaboration among the three main professional categories (family physicians, nurses and administrative personnel) were 75% in all centers. Just over half of the patients that attended (n = 11650; 51.9%) were reached in terms of having their lifestyle habits assessed, while more than a third (33.7%; n = 7433) and almost 10% (n = 2175) received advice or a printed prescription for at least one lifestyle change, respectively. Only 3.7% of the target population received a repeat prescription. These process indicators significantly (p < 0.001) varied by center, lifestyle habit and patient characteristics. Sustainability of intervention components changed thorough the implementation period within centers.

Conclusions: The implementation strategy used showed moderate-to-good performance on process indicators related to adoption, reach, and implementation of the evidence-based healthy lifestyle promotion intervention in the context of routine primary care. Sources of heterogeneity and instability in these indicators may improve our understanding of factors required to attain adequate program adoption and implementation through improved implementation strategies.

Keywords: Health promotion; Implementation; Primary Health Care; Process evaluation.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Cumulative exposure of patients to the main intervention components in the four collaborating centers over the 2-year program implementation period
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Peters DH, Adam T, Alonge O, Agyepong IA, Tran N. Implementation research: what it is and how to do it. BMJ. 2013;347:f6753. doi: 10.1136/bmj.f7086. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Neta G, Glasgow RE, Carpenter CR, Grimshaw JM, Rabin BA, Fernandez ME, Brownson RC. A Framework for Enhancing the Value of Research for Dissemination and Implementation. Am J Public Health. 2015;105(1):49–57. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2014.302206. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Medical Research Council . Developing and evaluating complex interventions: new guidance. London: Medical Research Council; 2008.
    1. Saunders RP, Evans MH, Joshi P. Developing a process-evaluation plan for assessing health promotion program implementation: a how-to guide. Health Promot Pract. 2005;6(2):134–47. doi: 10.1177/1524839904273387. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Grant A, Treweek S, Dreischulte T, Foy R, Guthrie B. Process evaluations for cluster-randomised trials of complex interventions: a proposed framework for design and reporting. Trials. 2013;14:15. doi: 10.1186/1745-6215-14-15. - DOI - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources