Background
Methods/design
Overview
Philosophical positioning
Adults hospitalised with an exacerbation of COPD | Adults with COPD who attend Respiratory Medicine out-patients | |
---|---|---|
Referral to PR | Proportion referred to PR prior to or within 2 weeks of hospital discharge. | Proportion referred to PR within 2 weeks of attendance at a Respiratory Medicine clinic appointment. |
Attendance to an initial appointment | Proportion who attend an initial assessment with a Physiotherapist to determine suitability to enrol into an exercise training program. | Proportion who attend an initial assessment with a Physiotherapist to determine suitability to enrol into an exercise training program. |
Commence PR | Proportion who attend at least one exercise training session overseen by a Physiotherapist. | Proportion who attend at least one exercise training session overseen by a Physiotherapist. |
Attendance to PR | Proportion who attend ≥80% of the scheduled exercise training sessions overseen by a Physiotherapist. | Proportion who attend ≥80% of the scheduled exercise training sessions overseen by a Physiotherapist. |
Provision of a maintenance strategy | Proportion who are referred to a maintenance program on completion of exercise training sessions overseen by a Physiotherapist. | Proportion who are referred to a maintenance program on completion of exercise training sessions overseen by a Physiotherapist. |
Phase 1: observing target behaviours of healthcare professionals and people with COPD to quantify current implementation of PR
Inclusion criteria
Informed consent and data collection
Phase 2: exploring the determinants of target behaviours from the perspectives of healthcare professionals, people with COPD and their primary support person
Informed consent
Interview structure
Phase 3: co-creation, field testing and application of strategies to optimise target behaviours pertaining to PR implementation
Informed consent
Workshop content
Workshop content | Fieldwork tasks |
---|---|
Initial workshop: obtain written informed consent and establish guiding principles of participatory workshops. Upskill co-creators by presenting data obtained during Phases 1 and 2. Develop objectives for Phase 3. | Reflect and diarise the extent to which the determinants of target behaviours are similar or different to their own experiences. |
Subsequent workshops: review diaries and reflections of co-creators, use data-prompting and probing questions to seek strategies linked to intervention functions and policy level approaches that align with the determinants of target behaviours. Consider various perspectives. Consider strategies for target behaviours in those hospitalised with an exacerbation of COPD separately from those who visit Respiratory Medicine clinics with ‘stable’ disease. Consider likely challenges and strategies to overcome them. | Seek information and collate ideas regarding strategies to optimise target behaviours. Draw from sources such as peer group discussions, opinions of family and friends, media and the internet. Co-created strategies to be field tested in real time with an opportunity to reflect on successes and challenges, and fine tune them as required. |
Final workshops: share final intervention strategies; modify (if necessary) to ensure the findings are representative of the co-creators’ opinions and experiences. |
Phase 4: evaluating the influence of co-created strategies on target behaviours pertaining to PR implementation
Partnering with consumers and end-users
Sample size
Phase 1 and 4
Phase 2 and 3
Data analysis
Phase 1 and 4
Phase 2
Phase 3
Section | Checklist item |
---|---|
Planning | |
How was the aim of the study framed? | 1. Use each element of the PRODUCES framework (Problem, Objective, Design, (end)-Users, Co-creators, Evaluation, Scalability). |
Explain the sampling procedure | 2. Explain the criteria used for sampling. 3. In what setting did the sampling occur? 4. How many individuals engage as co-creators? (Academic / non-academic stakeholders?) . 5. Describe the co-creators (demographics / groups / other characteristics of interest). |
Conducting | |
How was ownership manifested? | 6) Explain the methods used to manifest ownership among the co-creators. |
Procedure components | 7) What level of participation was there from the co-creators? 8) How was the overall aim presented? 9) How was the purpose of each meeting presented? 10) What were the rules and responsibilities of participation agreed upon? |
Procedure methods | 11) In which areas did the co-creators require upskilling? 12) What previous evidence was reviewed, and how? 12) If a prototype was developed, describe the prototype and the prototyping process. 14) Describe the frequency and duration of meetings. 15) Give examples of interactive techniques or methods used. 16) Give examples of fieldwork techniques or methods used. 17) Give examples of how iteration occurred during the process. |
Evaluation | |
Process | 18) Explain how co-creators satisfaction and contribution was evaluated (e.g. reporting attendance rates, feedback questionnaires, interviews, etc.). 19) How are results reported back to stakeholders and the public? |
Outcome | 20) Explain how the validity of the outcome and process were evaluated (e.g. face validation, member checking, etc.). 22) Explain plans for formal testing of the effectiveness/scalability of the co-created outcome. 21) Explain outcome of the evaluation (if tested). |