Souraya Sidani - Nursing and Health Interventions

The process for designing, evaluating, and implementing interventions is systematic and rigorous, yet flexible and iterative (Czajkowski et al., 2015; Medical Research Council, 2019). It involves phases that are logically sequenced. Although some may be conducted simultaneously, the results of each phase drive the work forward toward the next phase or backward toward earlier phases. For instance, feasibility and acceptability can be examined simultaneously rather than sequentially. Newly developed interventions found acceptable to the target population are moved to the next phase for evaluating their effectiveness, whereas interventions deemed unacceptable should be reconceptualized to optimize their design (i.e. moved back to the drawing board!). Each phase is carried out using research designs and methods that are most pertinent to address the respective research questions or achieve the stated aims, and to maintain the validity of findings. The phases are briefly mentioned in Table 1.1, with an emphasis on what they aim to achieve. The book is organized into sections that detail the research methods that can be used in designing, evaluating, and implementing interventions. Different methods are discussed, consistent with the recommendation for selecting those that are most appropriate to address the research questions and are feasible within the practice context.

TABLE 1.1 Phases of the process for designing, evaluating, and implementing interventions.

1 Aarons, G.A., Green, A.E., Palinkas, L.A., et al. (2012) Dynamic adaptation process to implement an evidence‐based child maltreatment intervention. Implementation Science, 7, 32–40.

2 Bach‐Mortensen, A.M, Lange, B.C.L., & Montgomery, P. (2018) Barriers and facilitators to implementing evidence‐based interventions among third sector organization: A systematic review. Implementation Science, 13, 103–121.

3 Barello S, Graffigna G, & Vegni E. (2012) Patient engagement as an emerging challenge for healthcare services: Mapping the literature. Nursing Research and Practice, 2012, 905–934.

4 Barrera, M., Castro, F.G., Strycker, L.A., et al. (2013) Cultural adaptations of behavioral health interventions: A Progress report. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 81(2), 196–205.

5 Beck, C., McSweeney, J.C., Richards, K.C., et al. (2010) Challenges in tailored intervention research. Nursing Outlook, 58(2), 104–110.

6 Benedikt, C., Kelly, S.L., Wilson, D., & Wilson, D.P., on behalf of the Optima Consortium (2016) Allocative and implementation efficiency in HIV prevention and treatment for people who inject drugs. International Journal of Drug Policy, 38, 73–80.

7 Bleijenberg, N., de Man‐van Ginkel, J.M., Trappenburg, J.C.A., et al. (2018) Increasing value and reducing waste by optimizing the development of complex interventions: Enriching the development phase of the Medical Research Council (MRC) framework. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 79, 86–93.

8 de Boer, D., Delnoij, D., & Rademakers, J. (2013) The importance of patient‐centered care for various groups. Patient Education and Counseling, 90, 405–410.

9 Bonell, C., Jamal, F., Melendez‐Torres, G.J., & Cummins, S. (2015) ‘Dark logic’: Theorizing the harmful consequences of public health interventions. Journal of Epidemiology & Community Health, 69, 95–98.

10 Bonell, C., Moore, G., Warren, E., & Moore, L. (2018) Are randomised controlled trials positivist? Reviewing the social science and philosophy literature to assess positivist tendencies of trials of social interventions in public health and health services. Trials, 19(1), 238–249.

11 Bothwell, L.E., Greene, J.A., Podolsky, S.H., et al. (2016) Assessing the gold standard—Lessons from the history of RCTs. New England Journal of Medicine, 374, 2175–2181.

12 Braithwaite, J, Churruca, K, Long, J.C., et al. (2018) When complexity science meets implementation science: A theoretical and empirical analysis of system change. BMC Medicine, 16, 63–76.

13 Britten N, Moore L, Lydahl D, et al. (2017) Elaboration of the Gothenburg model of person‐centred care. Health Expectations, 20, 407–418.

14 Cambon, L., Terral, P., & Alla, F. (2019) From intervention to interventional system: towards greater theorization in population health intervention research. BMC Public Health, 19, 389–345.

15 Chandler, J., Rycroft‐Malone, J., Hawkes, C., & Noyes, J. (2016) Application of simplified complexity theory concepts for healthcare social systems to explain the implementation of evidence into practice. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 72(2), 461–480.