Developing theory-informed behaviour change interventions to implement evidence into practice: a systematic approach using the Theoretical Domains Framework
By Simon D. French, Sally E. Green, Denise A. O’Connor, Joanne E Mckenzie, Jill J. Francis, Susan Michie, Rachelle Buchbinder, Peter Schattner, Neil Spike, J. Grimshaw. Implementation Science, 2012
861 citations recorded by the source corpus.
BackgroundThere is little systematic operational guidance about how best to develop complex interventions to reduce the gap between practice and evidence. This article is one in a Series of articles documenting the development and use of the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) to advance the science of implementation research.MethodsThe intervention was developed considering three main components: theory, evidence, and practical issues. We used a four-step approach, consisting of guiding questions, to direct the choice of the most appropriate components of an implementation intervention: Who needs to do what, differently? Using a theoretical framework, which barriers and enablers need to be addressed? Which intervention components (behaviour change techniques and mode(s) of delivery) could overcome the modifiable barriers and enhance the enablers? And how can behaviour change be measured and understood?ResultsA complex implementation intervention was designed that aimed to improve acute low back pain management in primary care. We used the TDF to identify the barriers and enablers to the uptake of evidence into practice and to guide the choice of intervention components. These components were then combined into a cohesive intervention. The intervention was delivered via two facilitated interactive small group workshops. We also produced a DVD to distribute to all participants in the intervention group. We chose outcome measures in order to assess the mediating mechanisms of behaviour change.ConclusionsWe have illustrated a four-step systematic method for developing an intervention designed to change clinical practice based on a theoretical framework. The method of development provides a systematic framework that could be used by others developing complex implementation interventions. While this framework should be iteratively adjusted and refined to suit other contexts and settings, we believe that the four-step process should be maintained as the primary framework to guide researchers through a comprehensive intervention development process.
Subfields: General Health Professions, Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/73f27ff9b5cd3952523c4934a189a9d3de2e1b82
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In General Health Professions
In Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health
Citations in the corpus
- Theories of behaviour and behaviour change across the social and behavioural sciences: a scoping review (2014, positive): “Informed by 128 explanatory constructs from 33 theories of behaviour, the TDF has been used in many contexts to understand behaviour and design theoretically informed interventions (Francis, O’Connor, & Curran, 2012; French et al., 2012).”
- Validation of the theoretical domains framework for use in behaviour change and implementation research (2012, neutral): “For example, in Australia it has been used to identify the barriers and enablers to the implementation of evidence-based guidelines for acute low back pain [14,15] and develop theory-informed behaviour change interventions [16].”
- Methods to Improve the Selection and Tailoring of Implementation Strategies (2017, neutral): “Conceptual frameworks(14) can guide research and practice by suggesting factors that influence implementation outcomes(15,16) and providing some direction for the selection and tailoring of strategies.(17,18) But, researchers often fail to explicitly refer to guiding conceptual frameworks,(12,19) an”
- A systematic review of the use of the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (2015, neutral): “Better integration of the CFIR (or other theoretical framework) into empirical studies would help to address gaps in use of theory and advance implementation science [4, 31, 32].”
- A guide to using the Theoretical Domains Framework of behaviour change to investigate implementation problems (2017, neutral): “Examples include GPs, physiotherapist and chiropractors to manage acute low back pain [36, 37]; emergency department staff management of mild traumatic brain injury [38]; hospital clinician adherence to national guidelines on the management of suspected viral encephalitis [39]; and implementation of”
- How to study improvement interventions: a brief overview of possible study types (2015, neutral): “21 – 32 A small but important stream of work focuses on developing and testing tools to be used as part of improvement efforts, such as measurement instruments or analytical frameworks for characterisation of contexts, assessment of the impact of interventions, 33 or determination of organisational…”