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
. 2023 Sep;28(3):753-772.
doi: 10.1111/bjhp.12652. Epub 2023 Feb 26.

Exploring barriers and enablers to the delivery of Making Every Contact Count brief behavioural interventions in Ireland: A cross-sectional survey study

Oonagh Meade  1 , Maria O'Brien  2 , Chris Noone  1 , Agatha Lawless  3 , Jenny McSharry  1 , Helen Deely  4 , Jo Hart  5 , Catherine B Hayes  6 , Chris Keyworth  7 , Kim Lavoie  8 , Orla McGowan  9 , Andrew W Murphy  10 , Patrick J Murphy  11 , Orlaith O'Reilly  12 ; Health Psychology Public Advisory Panel  13 ; Molly Byrne  1
Affiliations

Exploring barriers and enablers to the delivery of Making Every Contact Count brief behavioural interventions in Ireland: A cross-sectional survey study

Oonagh Meade et al. Br J Health Psychol. 2023 Sep.

Abstract

Objectives: The public health impact of the Irish Making Every Contact Count (MECC) brief intervention programme is dependent on delivery by health care professionals. We aimed to identify enablers and modifiable barriers to MECC intervention delivery to optimize MECC implementation.

Design: Online cross-sectional survey design.

Methods: Health care professionals (n = 4050) who completed MECC eLearning were invited to complete an online survey based on the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF). Multiple regression analysis identified predictors of MECC delivery (logistic regression to predict delivery or not; linear regression to predict frequency of delivery). Data were visualized using Confidence Interval-Based Estimates of Relevance (CIBER).

Results: Seventy-nine per cent of participants (n = 283/357) had delivered a MECC intervention. In the multiple logistic regression (Nagelkerke's R2 = .34), the significant enablers of intervention delivery were 'professional role' (OR = 1.86 [1.10, 3.15]) and 'intentions/goals' (OR = 4.75 [1.97, 11.45]); significant barriers included 'optimistic beliefs about consequences' (OR = .41 [.18, .94]) and 'negative emotions' (OR = .50 [.32, .77]). In the multiple linear regression (R2 = .29), the significant enablers of frequency of MECC delivery were 'intentions/goals' (b = 10.16, p = .02) and professional role (b = 6.72, p = .03); the significant barriers were 'negative emotions' (b = -4.74, p = .04) and 'barriers to prioritisation' (b = -5.00, p = .01). CIBER analyses suggested six predictive domains with substantial room for improvement: 'intentions and goals', 'barriers to prioritisation', 'environmental resources', 'beliefs about capabilities', 'negative emotions' and 'skills'.

Conclusion: Implementation interventions to enhance MECC delivery should target intentions and goals, beliefs about capabilities, negative emotions, environmental resources, skills and barriers to prioritization.

Keywords: Making Every Contact Count; alcohol and drug use; behavioural intervention; brief; chronic illness prevention; diet; eLearning; exercise; implementation strategy; smoking.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

REFERENCES

    1. Alageel, S., Gulliford, M. C., McDermott, L., & Wright, A. J. (2018). Implementing multiple health behaviour change interventions for cardiovascular risk reduction in primary care: A qualitative study. BMC Family Practice, 19(1), 171. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12875-018-0860-0
    1. Albury, C., Hall, A., Syed, A., Ziebland, S., Stokoe, E., Roberts, N., Webb, H., & Aveyard, P. (2019). Communication practices for delivering health behaviour change conversations in primary care: A systematic review and thematic synthesis. BMC Family Practice, 20(1), 111. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12875-019-0992-x
    1. Aveyard, P., Begh, R., Parsons, A., & West, R. (2012). Brief opportunistic smoking cessation interventions: A systematic review and meta-analysis to compare advice to quit and offer of assistance: Brief interventions for smoking cessation. Addiction, 107(6), 1066-1073. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1360-0443.2011.03770.x
    1. Aveyard, P., Lewis, A., Tearne, S., Hood, K., Christian-Brown, A., Adab, P., Begh, R., Jolly, K., Daley, A., Farley, A., Lycett, D., Nickless, A., Yu, L.-M., Retat, L., Webber, L., Pimpin, L., & Jebb, S. A. (2016). Screening and brief intervention for obesity in primary care: A parallel, two-arm, randomised trial. The Lancet, 388(10059), Art., 10059. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(16)31893-1
    1. Bouma, S. E., van Beek, J. F. E., Diercks, R. L., van der Woude, L. H. V., Stevens, M., & van den Akker-Scheek, I. (2022). Barriers and facilitators perceived by healthcare professionals for implementing lifestyle interventions in patients with osteoarthritis: A scoping review. BMJ Open, 12(2), e056831. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2021-056831

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources