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
. 2024 May 7:4:1152410.
doi: 10.3389/frhs.2024.1152410. eCollection 2024.

A community health worker led approach to cardiovascular disease prevention in the UK-SPICES-Sussex (scaling-up packages of interventions for cardiovascular disease prevention in selected sites in Europe and Sub-saharan Africa): an implementation research project

Affiliations

A community health worker led approach to cardiovascular disease prevention in the UK-SPICES-Sussex (scaling-up packages of interventions for cardiovascular disease prevention in selected sites in Europe and Sub-saharan Africa): an implementation research project

Thomas Grice-Jackson et al. Front Health Serv. .

Abstract

Background: This paper describes a UK-based study, SPICES-Sussex, which aimed to co-produce and implement a community-based cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk assessment and reduction intervention to support under-served populations at moderate risk of CVD. The objectives were to enhance stakeholder engagement; to implement the intervention in four research sites and to evaluate the use of Voluntary and Community and Social Enterprises (VCSE) and Community Health Worker (CHW) partnerships in health interventions.

Methods: A type three hybrid implementation study design was used with mixed methods data. This paper represents the process evaluation of the implementation of the SPICES-Sussex Project. The evaluation was conducted using the RE-AIM framework.

Results: Reach: 381 individuals took part in the risk profiling questionnaire and forty-one women, and five men participated in the coaching intervention. Effectiveness: quantitative results from intervention participants showed significant improvements in CVD behavioural risk factors across several measures. Qualitative data indicated high acceptability, with the holistic, personalised, and person-centred approach being valued by participants. Adoption: 50% of VCSEs approached took part in the SPICES programme, The CHWs felt empowered to deliver high-quality and mutually beneficial coaching within a strong project infrastructure that made use of VCSE partnerships. Implementation: Co-design meetings resulted in local adaptations being made to the intervention. 29 (63%) of participants completed the intervention. Practical issues concerned how to embed CHWs in a health service context, how to keep engaging participants, and tensions between research integrity and the needs and expectations of those in the voluntary sector. Maintenance: Several VCSEs expressed an interest in continuing the intervention after the end of the SPICES programme.

Conclusion: Community-engagement approaches have the potential to have positively impact the health and wellbeing of certain groups. Furthermore, VCSEs and CHWs represent a significant untapped resource in the UK. However, more work needs to be done to understand how links between the sectors can be bridged to deliver evidence-based effective alternative preventative healthcare. Reaching vulnerable populations remains a challenge despite partnerships with VCSEs which are embedded in the community. By showing what went well and what did not, this project can guide future work in community engagement for health.

Keywords: RE-AIM (reach; adoption; cardiovascular disease; community based participatory research; community health workers (CHW); effectiveness; implementation and maintenance); implementation research.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Primary outcome measures for the “Reach” and “Effectiveness” components of the SPICES-Sussex intervention. (A) The proportion of “Low”, “Medium”, and “High” risk participants identified during the Interheart risk profiling questionnaire; (B) the mean Interheart score pre and post intervention for those who completed the intervention, p value from paired t-tests; (C) shows the % change regularly of dietary behaviours from pre/post intervention UKDDQ score, within-group t-tests; (D) the change in the % of intervention participants classified as having either low or medium/high activity levels pre and post intervention, p value from McNemar's test.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. World Health Organisation. Cardiovascular Diseases Fact Sheet. (2022) (cited Nov 7, 2022). Cardiovascular diseases Fact Sheet. Available online at: https://www.who.int/health-topics/cardiovascular-diseases#tab=tab_1
    1. Matsushita K, Ding N, Kou M, Hu X, Chen M, Gao Y, et al. The relationship of COVID-19 severity with cardiovascular disease and its traditional risk factors: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Glob Heart. (2020) 15(1). 10.5334/gh.814 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Prevention of Cardiovascular disease (PH25)—Review Proposal (2014).
    1. Marsh K, Phillips CJ, Fordham R, Bertranou E, Hale J. Estimating cost-effectiveness in public health: a summary of modelling and valuation methods. Health Econ Rev. (2012) 2(1):1–6. 10.1186/2191-1991-2-17 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Brush BL, Mentz G, Jensen M, Jacobs B, Saylor KM, Rowe Z, et al. Success in long-standing community-based participatory research (CBPR) partnerships: a scoping literature review. Health Educ Behav. (2020) 47(4):556–68. 10.1177/1090198119882989 - DOI - PMC - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources