Surveying knowledge, practice and attitudes towards intervention fidelity within trials of complex healthcare interventions.
Surveying knowledge, practice and attitudes towards intervention fidelity within trials of complex healthcare interventions.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1186/s13063-018-2838-6
复制
发表时间：
2018-09-19
期刊：
影响因子：
2.5
通讯作者：
Toomey E
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
McGee D;Lorencatto F;Matvienko-Sikar K;Toomey E
干预保真度是干预措施按照其开发人员的意图实施的程度。评估保真度对于准确解释干预有效性至关重要，但在复杂的医疗干预试验中，保真度往往得不到很好的解决。其原因尚不清楚，关于在复杂干预试验中使用方法提高和评估保真度的信息仍然不足。本研究旨在探讨参与复杂医疗干预试验设计和实施的研究人员、试验参与者和医疗保健专业人员对干预保真度的知识、实践和态度。进行了一项在线调查，包括封闭式和开放式问题，涉及四个部分（人口统计学、富达知识、实践和态度）。这是具有直接参与复杂医疗保健干预试验（例如设计/开发、实施、评价）经验的个人的机会主义样本。对来自15个国家的264名参与者的数据进行了分析。大多数（65.9%，n = 174）参与者认为自己是“研究人员”。大多数参与者熟悉术语“干预保真度”（69.7%，n = 184），并表示保真度很重要（89.7%，n = 236）。平均自我报告的忠诚度的理解是中等的。虽然68%（n = 182）以前使用的策略，以评估（如音频/视频记录会议）和提高（如培训手册）的保真度在复杂的干预措施的试验，只有有限比例的参与者表示，总是报告这些策略在随后的出版物（30.9%，n = 56）。缺乏知识或理解是在试验中解决干预保真度的最常见障碍（77.4%，n = 202）。超过一半的受访者（52.1%，n = 137）从未完成过具体的忠诚度培训或研究，绝大多数（89.7%，n = 236）欢迎在这方面的具体培训。尽管很好地认识到干预保真度及其重要性，知识和理解不足似乎是一个关键因素，限制如何干预保真度是解决复杂的干预措施的试验。与会者确认需要在这一领域开展进一步的培训和教育。此外，澄清干预保真度的术语、定义和组成部分将有助于更好地理解这一概念。参与者使用的保真度策略和随后的报告之间的差异引起了人们对试验文献中保真度报告不足的担忧。本文的在线版本（10.1186/s13063-018-2838-6）包含补充材料，可供授权用户使用。
Intervention fidelity is the degree to which interventions have been implemented as intended by their developers. Assessing fidelity is crucial for accurate interpretation of intervention effectiveness, but fidelity is often poorly addressed within trials of complex healthcare interventions. The reasons for this are unclear, and information on the use of methods to enhance and assess fidelity in trials of complex interventions remains insufficient. This study aimed to explore the knowledge, practice and attitudes towards intervention fidelity amongst researchers, triallists and healthcare professionals involved with the design and conduct of trials of complex healthcare interventions. An online survey consisting of closed and open-ended questions exploring four sections (Demographics, Fidelity knowledge, Practice and Attitudes) was conducted. This was an opportunistic sample of individuals with experience of direct involvement in trials of complex healthcare interventions (e.g. design/development, conduct, evaluation). Data from 264 participants representing 15 countries were analysed. The majority (65.9%, n = 174) of participants identified themselves as ‘Researchers’. The majority of participants were familiar with the term “intervention fidelity” (69.7%, n = 184) and indicated that fidelity is important (89.7%, n = 236). Mean self-reported understanding of fidelity was moderate. Although 68% (n = 182) had previously used strategies to assess (e.g. audio/video-recording sessions) and enhance (e.g. training manual) fidelity in trials of complex interventions, only a limited proportion of participants indicated always reporting these strategies in subsequent publications (30.9%, n = 56). Poor knowledge or understanding was the most commonly cited barrier to addressing intervention fidelity in trials (77.4%, n = 202). Over half of respondents (52.1%, n = 137) had never completed specific fidelity training or research, and the vast majority (89.7%, n = 236) would welcome specific training in this area. Despite good awareness of intervention fidelity and its importance, poor knowledge and understanding appears to be a key factor limiting how intervention fidelity is addressed in trials of complex interventions. Participants identified a need for further training and education in this area. Additionally, clarification of the terminology, definition and components of intervention fidelity would facilitate better understanding of the concept. A discrepancy between participants’ use of fidelity strategies and subsequent reporting raises concerns around inadequate fidelity reporting in the trials literature. The online version of this article (10.1186/s13063-018-2838-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子：
12.7
作者：
Glasgow, RE;Vogt, TM;Boles, SM
通讯作者：
Boles, SM
影响因子：
3.2
作者：
Hsieh, HF;Shannon, SE
通讯作者：
Shannon, SE
DOI：
10.1136/bmj.h1258
发表时间：
2015-03-19
期刊：
BMJ (Clinical research ed.)
影响因子：
--
作者：
Moore GF;Audrey S;Barker M;Bond L;Bonell C;Hardeman W;Moore L;O'Cathain A;Tinati T;Wight D;Baird J
通讯作者：
Baird J
影响因子：
2
作者：
Karas, Steve;Plankis, Laura
通讯作者：
Plankis, Laura
影响因子：
4.1
作者：
McHugh, R. Kathryn;Murray, Heather W.;Barlow, David H.
通讯作者：
Barlow, David H.