Implementation of a consumer-focused eHealth intervention for people with moderate-to-high cardiovascular disease risk: Protocol for a mixed-methods process evaluation

Genevieve M. Coorey, Lis Neubeck, Timothy Usherwood, David Peiris, Sharon Parker, Annie Y.S. Lau, Clara Chow, Kathryn Panaretto, Mark Harris, Nicholas Zwar, Julie Redfern

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

4 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Introduction: Technology-mediated strategies have potential to engage patients in modifying unhealthy behaviour and improving medication adherence to reduce morbidity and mortality from cardiovascular disease (CVD). Furthermore, electronic tools offer a medium by which consumers can more actively navigate personal healthcare information. Understanding how, why and among whom such strategies have an effect can help determine the requirements for implementing them at a scale. This paper aims to detail a process evaluation that will (1) assess implementation fidelity of a multicomponent eHealth intervention; (2) determine its effective features; (3) explore contextual factors influencing and maintaining user engagement; and (4) describe barriers, facilitators, preferences and acceptability of such interventions. Methods and analysis: Mixed-methods sequential design to derive, examine, triangulate and report data from multiple sources. Quantitative data from 3 sources will help to inform both sampling and content framework for the qualitative data collection: (1) surveys of patients and general practitioners (GPS); (2) software analytics; (3) programme delivery records. Qualitative data from interviews with patients and GPS, focus groups with patients and field notes taken by intervention delivery staff will be thematically analysed. Concurrent interview data collection and analysis will enable a thematic framework to evolve inductively and inform theory building, consistent with a realistic evaluation perspective. Eligible patients are those at moderate-to-high CVD risk who were randomised to the intervention arm of a randomised controlled trial of an eHealth intervention and are contactable at completion of the follow-up period; eligible GPS are the primary healthcare providers of these patients. Ethics and dissemination: Ethics approval has been received from the University of Sydney Human Research Ethics Committee and the Aboriginal Health and Medical Research Council (AH&MRC) of New South Wales. Results will be disseminated via scientific forums including peer-reviewed publications and national and international conferences.

Original languageEnglish
Article number014353
JournalBMJ Open
Volume7
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Jan 2017
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Telemedicine
Cardiovascular Diseases
General Practitioners
Information Storage and Retrieval
Ethics
Interviews
New South Wales
Medication Adherence
Research Ethics Committees
Focus Groups
Health Personnel
Publications
Biomedical Research
Primary Health Care
Software
Randomized Controlled Trials
Technology
Morbidity
Delivery of Health Care
Mortality

Cite this

Coorey, Genevieve M. ; Neubeck, Lis ; Usherwood, Timothy ; Peiris, David ; Parker, Sharon ; Lau, Annie Y.S. ; Chow, Clara ; Panaretto, Kathryn ; Harris, Mark ; Zwar, Nicholas ; Redfern, Julie. / Implementation of a consumer-focused eHealth intervention for people with moderate-to-high cardiovascular disease risk : Protocol for a mixed-methods process evaluation. In: BMJ Open. 2017 ; Vol. 7, No. 1.
@article{44fb0f9ff55e467b8336fc133160cb18,
title = "Implementation of a consumer-focused eHealth intervention for people with moderate-to-high cardiovascular disease risk: Protocol for a mixed-methods process evaluation",
abstract = "Introduction: Technology-mediated strategies have potential to engage patients in modifying unhealthy behaviour and improving medication adherence to reduce morbidity and mortality from cardiovascular disease (CVD). Furthermore, electronic tools offer a medium by which consumers can more actively navigate personal healthcare information. Understanding how, why and among whom such strategies have an effect can help determine the requirements for implementing them at a scale. This paper aims to detail a process evaluation that will (1) assess implementation fidelity of a multicomponent eHealth intervention; (2) determine its effective features; (3) explore contextual factors influencing and maintaining user engagement; and (4) describe barriers, facilitators, preferences and acceptability of such interventions. Methods and analysis: Mixed-methods sequential design to derive, examine, triangulate and report data from multiple sources. Quantitative data from 3 sources will help to inform both sampling and content framework for the qualitative data collection: (1) surveys of patients and general practitioners (GPS); (2) software analytics; (3) programme delivery records. Qualitative data from interviews with patients and GPS, focus groups with patients and field notes taken by intervention delivery staff will be thematically analysed. Concurrent interview data collection and analysis will enable a thematic framework to evolve inductively and inform theory building, consistent with a realistic evaluation perspective. Eligible patients are those at moderate-to-high CVD risk who were randomised to the intervention arm of a randomised controlled trial of an eHealth intervention and are contactable at completion of the follow-up period; eligible GPS are the primary healthcare providers of these patients. Ethics and dissemination: Ethics approval has been received from the University of Sydney Human Research Ethics Committee and the Aboriginal Health and Medical Research Council (AH&MRC) of New South Wales. Results will be disseminated via scientific forums including peer-reviewed publications and national and international conferences.",
author = "Coorey, {Genevieve M.} and Lis Neubeck and Timothy Usherwood and David Peiris and Sharon Parker and Lau, {Annie Y.S.} and Clara Chow and Kathryn Panaretto and Mark Harris and Nicholas Zwar and Julie Redfern",
year = "2017",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1136/bmjopen-2016-014353",
language = "English",
volume = "7",
journal = "BMJ Open",
issn = "2044-6055",
publisher = "BMJ Publishing Group",
number = "1",

}

Implementation of a consumer-focused eHealth intervention for people with moderate-to-high cardiovascular disease risk : Protocol for a mixed-methods process evaluation. / Coorey, Genevieve M.; Neubeck, Lis; Usherwood, Timothy; Peiris, David; Parker, Sharon; Lau, Annie Y.S.; Chow, Clara; Panaretto, Kathryn; Harris, Mark; Zwar, Nicholas; Redfern, Julie.

In: BMJ Open, Vol. 7, No. 1, 014353, 01.01.2017.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Implementation of a consumer-focused eHealth intervention for people with moderate-to-high cardiovascular disease risk

T2 - Protocol for a mixed-methods process evaluation

AU - Coorey, Genevieve M.

AU - Neubeck, Lis

AU - Usherwood, Timothy

AU - Peiris, David

AU - Parker, Sharon

AU - Lau, Annie Y.S.

AU - Chow, Clara

AU - Panaretto, Kathryn

AU - Harris, Mark

AU - Zwar, Nicholas

AU - Redfern, Julie

PY - 2017/1/1

Y1 - 2017/1/1

N2 - Introduction: Technology-mediated strategies have potential to engage patients in modifying unhealthy behaviour and improving medication adherence to reduce morbidity and mortality from cardiovascular disease (CVD). Furthermore, electronic tools offer a medium by which consumers can more actively navigate personal healthcare information. Understanding how, why and among whom such strategies have an effect can help determine the requirements for implementing them at a scale. This paper aims to detail a process evaluation that will (1) assess implementation fidelity of a multicomponent eHealth intervention; (2) determine its effective features; (3) explore contextual factors influencing and maintaining user engagement; and (4) describe barriers, facilitators, preferences and acceptability of such interventions. Methods and analysis: Mixed-methods sequential design to derive, examine, triangulate and report data from multiple sources. Quantitative data from 3 sources will help to inform both sampling and content framework for the qualitative data collection: (1) surveys of patients and general practitioners (GPS); (2) software analytics; (3) programme delivery records. Qualitative data from interviews with patients and GPS, focus groups with patients and field notes taken by intervention delivery staff will be thematically analysed. Concurrent interview data collection and analysis will enable a thematic framework to evolve inductively and inform theory building, consistent with a realistic evaluation perspective. Eligible patients are those at moderate-to-high CVD risk who were randomised to the intervention arm of a randomised controlled trial of an eHealth intervention and are contactable at completion of the follow-up period; eligible GPS are the primary healthcare providers of these patients. Ethics and dissemination: Ethics approval has been received from the University of Sydney Human Research Ethics Committee and the Aboriginal Health and Medical Research Council (AH&MRC) of New South Wales. Results will be disseminated via scientific forums including peer-reviewed publications and national and international conferences.

AB - Introduction: Technology-mediated strategies have potential to engage patients in modifying unhealthy behaviour and improving medication adherence to reduce morbidity and mortality from cardiovascular disease (CVD). Furthermore, electronic tools offer a medium by which consumers can more actively navigate personal healthcare information. Understanding how, why and among whom such strategies have an effect can help determine the requirements for implementing them at a scale. This paper aims to detail a process evaluation that will (1) assess implementation fidelity of a multicomponent eHealth intervention; (2) determine its effective features; (3) explore contextual factors influencing and maintaining user engagement; and (4) describe barriers, facilitators, preferences and acceptability of such interventions. Methods and analysis: Mixed-methods sequential design to derive, examine, triangulate and report data from multiple sources. Quantitative data from 3 sources will help to inform both sampling and content framework for the qualitative data collection: (1) surveys of patients and general practitioners (GPS); (2) software analytics; (3) programme delivery records. Qualitative data from interviews with patients and GPS, focus groups with patients and field notes taken by intervention delivery staff will be thematically analysed. Concurrent interview data collection and analysis will enable a thematic framework to evolve inductively and inform theory building, consistent with a realistic evaluation perspective. Eligible patients are those at moderate-to-high CVD risk who were randomised to the intervention arm of a randomised controlled trial of an eHealth intervention and are contactable at completion of the follow-up period; eligible GPS are the primary healthcare providers of these patients. Ethics and dissemination: Ethics approval has been received from the University of Sydney Human Research Ethics Committee and the Aboriginal Health and Medical Research Council (AH&MRC) of New South Wales. Results will be disseminated via scientific forums including peer-reviewed publications and national and international conferences.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85009466273&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-014353

DO - 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-014353

M3 - Article

VL - 7

JO - BMJ Open

JF - BMJ Open

SN - 2044-6055

IS - 1

M1 - 014353

ER -