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
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2017 Oct 17;13(1):78.
doi: 10.1186/s12992-017-0302-0.

Disentangling the effects of a multiple behaviour change intervention for diarrhoea control in Zambia: a theory-based process evaluation

Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Disentangling the effects of a multiple behaviour change intervention for diarrhoea control in Zambia: a theory-based process evaluation

Katie Greenland et al. Global Health. .

Abstract

Background: Diarrhoea is a leading cause of child death in Zambia. As elsewhere, the disease burden could be greatly reduced through caregiver uptake of existing prevention and treatment strategies. We recently reported the results of the Komboni Housewives intervention which tested a novel strategy employing motives including affiliation and disgust to improve caregiver practice of four diarrhoea control behaviours: exclusive breastfeeding; handwashing with soap; and correct preparation and use of oral rehydration salts (ORS) and zinc. The intervention was delivered via community events (women's forums and road shows), at health clinics (group session) and via radio. A cluster randomised trial revealed that the intervention resulted in a small improvement in exclusive breastfeeding practices, but was only associated with small changes in the other behaviours in areas with greater intervention exposure. This paper reports the findings of the process evaluation that was conducted alongside the trial to investigate how factors associated with intervention delivery and receipt influenced caregiver uptake of the target behaviours.

Methods: Process data were collected from the eight peri-urban and rural intervention areas throughout the six-month implementation period and in all 16 clusters 4-6 weeks afterwards. Intervention implementation (fidelity, reach, dose delivered and recruitment strategies) and receipt (participant engagement and responses, and mediators) were explored through review of intervention activity logs, unannounced observation of intervention events, semi-structured interviews, focus groups with implementers and intervention recipients, and household surveys. Evaluation methods and analyses were guided by the intervention's theory of change and the evaluation framework of Linnan and Steckler.

Results: Intervention reach was lower than intended: 39% of the surveyed population reported attending one or more face-to-face intervention event, of whom only 11% attended two or more intervention events. The intervention was not equally feasible to deliver in all settings: fewer events took place in remote rural areas, and the intervention did not adequately penetrate communities in several peri-urban sites where the population density was high, the population was slightly higher socio-economic status, recruitment was challenging, and numerous alternative sources of entertainment existed. Adaptations made by the implementers affected the fidelity of implementation of messages for all target behaviours. Incorrect messages were consequently recalled by intervention recipients. Participants were most receptive to the novel disgust and skills-based interactive demonstrations targeting exclusive breastfeeding and ORS preparation respectively. However, initial disgust elicitation was not followed by a change in associated psychological mediators, and social norms were not measurably changed.

Conclusions: The lack of measured behaviour change was likely due to issues with both the intervention's content and its delivery. Achieving high reach and intensity in community interventions delivered in diverse settings is challenging. Achieving high fidelity is also challenging when multiple behaviours are targeted for change. Further work using improved tools is needed to explore the use of subconscious motives in behaviour change interventions. To better uncover how and why interventions achieve their measured effects, process evaluations of complex interventions should develop and employ frameworks for investigation and interpretation that are structured around the intervention's theory of change and the local context.

Trial registration: The study was registered as part of the larger trial on 5 March 2014 with ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02081521 .

Keywords: Behaviour change; Breastfeeding; Handwashing; Oral rehydration salts; Process evaluation; Theory of change; Zinc.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Ethics approval and consent to participate

We obtained written informed consent or a witnessed thumbprint from all participants, regardless of the method. The study protocol was approved by the ethics board at the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine (approval number 6493) and by the University of Zambia Biomedical Research Ethics Committee (ref 001–09-13). The Ministry of Health also gave permission for the study.

Consent for publication

Consent forms specifically stated the following: ‘I give permission for things that I say during interviews or focus groups to be quoted anonymously to communicate the findings of this research, to analyse this research and for teaching purposes. Information about the study could potentially be seen by researchers and students in Zambia and beyond and by health professionals and decision-makers in Zambia and beyond.’ To make this abstract concept more accessible, it was also explained to the participants verbally.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Process evaluation framework
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Relationship between socio-economic status and reported intervention attendance
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Word cloud illustrating reactions to the ‘Baby Tummy’ demonstration to promote exclusive breastfeeding. Greater prominence is given to words and phrases that were used more frequently
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
Proposed mechanisms by which the intervention and its implementation influenced behavioural outcomes

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Vindigni SM, Riley PL, Jhung M. Systematic review: handwashing behaviour in low- to middle-income countries: outcome measures and behaviour maintenance. Tropical Med Int Health. 2011;16:466–477. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-3156.2010.02720.x. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Aboud FE, Singla DR. Challenges to changing health behaviours in developing countries: a critical overview. Soc Sci Med. 2012;75:589–594. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2012.04.009. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Haroon S, Das JK, Salam RA, Imdad A, Bhutta ZA. Breastfeeding promotion interventions and breastfeeding practices: a systematic review. BMC Public Health. 2013;13(Suppl 3):S20. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-13-S3-S20. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Briscoe C, Aboud F. Behaviour change communication targeting four health behaviours in developing countries: a review of change techniques. Soc Sci Med. 2012;75:612–621. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2012.03.016. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Coryn C, Noakes L, Westine C, Schroter D. A systematic review of theory-driven evaluation practice from 1990 to 2009. Am J Eval. 2011;32:199–226. doi: 10.1177/1098214010389321. - DOI

Publication types

MeSH terms

Associated data