↓ Skip to main content

Evaluating the implementation process of a participatory organizational level occupational health intervention in schools

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, December 2016
Altmetric Badge

Citations

dimensions_citation
27 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
160 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Evaluating the implementation process of a participatory organizational level occupational health intervention in schools
Published in
BMC Public Health, December 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12889-016-3869-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Roosmarijn M. C. Schelvis, Noortje M. Wiezer, Birgitte M. Blatter, Joost A. G. M. van Genabeek, Karen M. Oude Hengel, Ernst T. Bohlmeijer, Allard J. van der Beek

Abstract

The importance of process evaluations in examining how and why interventions are (un) successful is increasingly recognized. Process evaluations mainly studied the implementation process and the quality of the implementation (fidelity). However, in adopting this approach for participatory organizational level occupational health interventions, important aspects such as context and participants perceptions are missing. Our objective was to systematically describe the implementation process of a participatory organizational level occupational health intervention aimed at reducing work stress and increasing vitality in two schools by applying a framework that covers aspects of the intervention and its implementation as well as the context and participants perceptions. A program theory was developed, describing the requirements for successful implementation. Each requirement was operationalized by making use of the framework, covering: initiation, communication, participation, fidelity, reach, communication, satisfaction, management support, targeting, delivery, exposure, culture, conditions, readiness for change and perceptions. The requirements were assessed by quantitative and qualitative data, collected at 12 and 24 months after baseline in both schools (questionnaire and interviews) or continuously (logbooks). The intervention consisted of a needs assessment phase and a phase of implementing intervention activities. The needs assessment phase was implemented successfully in school A, but not in school B where participation and readiness for change were insufficient. In the second phase, several intervention activities were implemented at school A, whereas this was only partly the case in school B (delivery). In both schools, however, participants felt not involved in the choice of intervention activities (targeting, participation, support), resulting in a negative perception of and only partial exposure to the intervention activities. Conditions, culture and events hindered the implementation of intervention activities in both schools. The framework helped us to understand why the implementation process was not successful. It is therefore considered of added value for the evaluation of implementation processes in participatory organizational level interventions, foremost because of the context and mental models dimensions. However, less demanding methods for doing detailed process evaluations need to be developed. This can only be done if we know more about the most important process components and this study contributes to that knowledge base. Netherlands Trial Register NTR3284 .

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 160 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 160 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 31 19%
Researcher 21 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 17 11%
Student > Bachelor 16 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 12 8%
Other 23 14%
Unknown 40 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 35 22%
Social Sciences 22 14%
Medicine and Dentistry 17 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 4%
Business, Management and Accounting 6 4%
Other 23 14%
Unknown 50 31%