11
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Exploring barriers and enablers to the delivery of Making Every Contact Count brief behavioural interventions in Ireland: A cross‐sectional survey study

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Objectives

          The public health impact of the Irish Making Every Contact Count (MECC) brief intervention programme is dependent on delivery by health care professionals. We aimed to identify enablers and modifiable barriers to MECC intervention delivery to optimize MECC implementation.

          Design

          Online cross‐sectional survey design.

          Methods

          Health care professionals ( n = 4050) who completed MECC eLearning were invited to complete an online survey based on the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF). Multiple regression analysis identified predictors of MECC delivery (logistic regression to predict delivery or not; linear regression to predict frequency of delivery). Data were visualized using Confidence Interval‐Based Estimates of Relevance (CIBER).

          Results

          Seventy‐nine per cent of participants ( n = 283/357) had delivered a MECC intervention. In the multiple logistic regression (Nagelkerke's R 2 = .34), the significant enablers of intervention delivery were ‘professional role’ (OR = 1.86 [1.10, 3.15]) and ‘intentions/goals’ (OR = 4.75 [1.97, 11.45]); significant barriers included ‘optimistic beliefs about consequences’ (OR = .41 [.18, .94]) and ‘negative emotions’ (OR = .50 [.32, .77]). In the multiple linear regression ( R 2 = .29), the significant enablers of frequency of MECC delivery were ‘intentions/goals’ ( b = 10.16, p = .02) and professional role ( b = 6.72, p = .03); the significant barriers were ‘negative emotions’ ( b = −4.74, p = .04) and ‘barriers to prioritisation’ ( b = −5.00, p = .01). CIBER analyses suggested six predictive domains with substantial room for improvement: ‘intentions and goals’, ‘barriers to prioritisation’, ‘environmental resources’, ‘beliefs about capabilities’, ‘negative emotions’ and ‘skills’.

          Conclusion

          Implementation interventions to enhance MECC delivery should target intentions and goals, beliefs about capabilities, negative emotions, environmental resources, skills and barriers to prioritization.

          Related collections

          Author and article information

          Contributors
          Journal
          British Journal of Health Psychology
          British J Health Psychol
          Wiley
          1359-107X
          2044-8287
          September 2023
          February 26 2023
          September 2023
          : 28
          : 3
          : 753-772
          Affiliations
          [1 ] Health Behaviour Change Research Group School of Psychology, University of Galway Galway Ireland
          [2 ] Office of the Chief Clinical Officer Health Services Executive Cork Ireland
          [3 ] Making Every Contact Count, Health & Wellbeing, Strategy & Research Health Services Executive Waterford Ireland
          [4 ] Strategy & Research, Healthcare Strategy Health Service Exectutive Dublin Ireland
          [5 ] University of Manchester Manchester UK
          [6 ] Public Health and Primary Care, Institute of Population Health Trinity College Dublin Dublin Ireland
          [7 ] University of Leeds Leeds UK
          [8 ] University of Quebec at Montreal (UQAM) & Montréal Behavioural Medicine Centre CIUSSS‐NIM Montréal Canada
          [9 ] Health Service Executive Health and Wellbeing Dublin Ireland
          [10 ] Health Research Board Primary Care Clinical Trials Network Ireland University of Galway Galway Ireland
          [11 ] Health Research Board Primary Care Clinical Trials Network Ireland, Discipline of General Practice University of Galway Galway Ireland
          [12 ] Office of the Chief Clinical Officer Health Services Executive Kilkenny Ireland
          Article
          10.1111/bjhp.12652
          36843183
          1a0cc168-e07e-421d-97a7-ea3569c9a093
          © 2023

          http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/

          History

          Comments

          Comment on this article