자연주의적 탐구조사(Naturalistic Inquiry)

Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques

Selection made on the basis of consequences is a causal mode found only in "living" things. Selection happens at the level of species, individual and culture. Human behaviour is the joint product of the contingencies of existence responsible for natural selection and of contingencies by which the behaviour of individuals are selected, including the contingencies maintained by an evolved social environment. Behaviour is not caused by immaterial processes inside the organism. It is the contingencies for behaviour and the behaviour itself that have to be analysed, and possibly changed. The implications for treatment may be great.

Selection by consequences

Background Given the substantial period of time adults spend in their workplaces each day, these provide an opportune setting for interventions addressing modifiable behavioural risk factors for chronic disease. Previous reviews of trials of workplace-based interventions suggest they can be effective in modifying a range of risk factors including diet, physical activity, obesity, risky alcohol use and tobacco use. However, such interventions are often poorly implemented in workplaces, limiting their impact on employee health. Identifying strategies that are effective in improving the implementation of workplace-based interventions has the potential to improve their effects on health outcomes. Objectives To assess the effects of strategies for improving the implementation of workplace-based policies or practices targeting diet, physical activity, obesity, tobacco use and alcohol use.Secondary objectives were to assess the impact of such strategies on employee health behaviours, including dietary intake, physical activity, weight status, and alcohol and tobacco use; evaluate their cost-effectiveness; and identify any unintended adverse effects of implementation strategies on workplaces or workplace staff. Search methods We searched the following electronic databases on 31 August 2017: CENTRAL; MEDLINE; MEDLINE In Process; the Campbell Library; PsycINFO; Education Resource Information Center (ERIC); Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL); and Scopus. We also handsearched all publications between August 2012 and September 2017 in two speciality journals: Implementation Science and Journal of Translational Behavioral Medicine. We conducted searches up to September 2017 in Dissertations and Theses, the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and the US National Institutes of Health Registry. We screened the reference lists of included trials and contacted authors to identify other potentially relevant trials. We also consulted experts in the field to identify other relevant research. Selection criteria Implementation strategies were defined as strategies specifically employed to improve the implementation of health interventions into routine practice within specific settings. We included any trial with a parallel control group (randomised or non-randomised) and conducted at any scale that compared strategies to support implementation of workplace policies or practices targeting diet, physical activity, obesity, risky alcohol use or tobacco use versus no intervention (i.e. wait-list, usual practice or minimal support control) or another implementation strategy. Implementation strategies could include those identified by the Effective Practice and Organisation of Care (EPOC) taxonomy such as quality improvement initiatives and education and training, as well as other strategies. Implementation interventions could target policies or practices directly instituted in the workplace environment, as well as workplace-instituted efforts encouraging the use of external health promotion services (e.g. gym membership subsidies). Data collection and analysis Review authors working in pairs independently performed citation screening, data extraction and 'Risk of bias' assessment, resolving disagreements via consensus or a third reviewer. We narratively synthesised findings for all included trials by first describing trial characteristics, participants, interventions and outcomes. We then described the effect size of the outcome measure for policy or practice implementation. We performed meta-analysis of implementation outcomes for trials of comparable design and outcome. Main results We included six trials, four of which took place in the USA. Four trials employed randomised controlled trial (RCT) designs. Trials were conducted in workplaces from the manufacturing, industrial and services-based sectors. The sample sizes of workplaces ranged from 12 to 114. Workplace policies and practices targeted included: healthy catering policies; point-of-purchase nutrition labelling; environmental supports for healthy eating and physical activity; tobacco control policies; weight management programmes; and adherence to guidelines for staff health promotion. All implementation interventions utilised multiple implementation strategies, the most common of which were educational meetings, tailored interventions and local consensus processes. Four trials compared an implementation strategy intervention with a no intervention control, one trial compared different implementation interventions, and one three-arm trial compared two implementation strategies with each other and a control. Four trials reported a single implementation outcome, whilst the other two reported multiple outcomes. Investigators assessed outcomes using surveys, audits and environmental observations. We judged most trials to be at high risk of performance and detection bias and at unclear risk of reporting and attrition bias.Of the five trials comparing implementation strategies with a no intervention control, pooled analysis was possible for three RCTs reporting continuous score-based measures of implementation outcomes. The meta-analysis found no difference in standardised effects (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.01, 95% CI -0.32 to 0.30; 164 participants; 3 studies; low certainty evidence), suggesting no benefit of implementation support in improving policy or practice implementation, relative to control. Findings for other continuous or dichotomous implementation outcomes reported across these five trials were mixed. For the two non-randomised trials examining comparative effectiveness, both reported improvements in implementation, favouring the more intensive implementation group (very low certainty evidence). Three trials examined the impact of implementation strategies on employee health behaviours, reporting mixed effects for diet and weight status (very low certainty evidence) and no effect for physical activity (very low certainty evidence) or tobacco use (low certainty evidence). One trial reported an increase in absolute workplace costs for health promotion in the implementation group (low certainty evidence). None of the included trials assessed adverse consequences. Limitations of the review included the small number of trials identified and the lack of consistent terminology applied in the implementation science field, which may have resulted in us overlooking potentially relevant trials in the search. Authors' conclusions Available evidence regarding the effectiveness of implementation strategies for improving implementation of health-promoting policies and practices in the workplace setting is sparse and inconsistent. Low certainty evidence suggests that such strategies may make little or no difference on measures of implementation fidelity or different employee health behaviour outcomes. It is also unclear if such strategies are cost-effective or have potential unintended adverse consequences. The limited number of trials identified suggests implementation research in the workplace setting is in its infancy, warranting further research to guide evidence translation in this setting.

Strategies to improve the implementation of workplace‐based policies or practices targeting tobacco, alcohol, diet, physical activity and obesity

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/2165079915612790

Total Worker Health®: More Implications for the Occupational Health Nurse.

Objectives. To determine the effectiveness of the COMmunity of Practice And Safety Support (COMPASS) Total Worker Health intervention for home care workers.Methods. We randomized 16 clusters of workers (n = 149) to intervention or usual-practice control conditions. The 12-month intervention was scripted and peer-led, and involved education on safety, health, and well-being; goal setting and self-monitoring; and structured social support. We collected measures at baseline, 6 months, and 12 months, which included workers’ experienced community of practice (i.e., people engaged in a common activity who interact regularly for shared learning and improvement). Implementation occurred during 2013 and 2014 in Oregon.Results. In an intent-to-treat analysis, relative to control, the intervention produced significant and sustained improvements in workers’ experienced community of practice. Additional significant improvements included the use of ergonomic tools or techniques for physical work, safety communication w...

Safety and Health Support for Home Care Workers: The COMPASS Randomized Controlled Trial

Objective: To develop a team-based Total Worker Health TM (injury prevention + health promotion) intervention for home care workers and estimate intervention effects on workers’ well-being and health and safety behaviors. Methods: Home care workers (n = 16) met monthly in teams for education and social support using a scripted, peer-led approach. Meeting process measures and pre-/postintervention outcome measures were collected. Results: Knowledge gains averaged 18.7% (standard deviation = 0.04), and 62.0% (standard deviation = 0.13) of participants reported making safety or health changes between meetings. Workers’ well-being improved significantly (life satisfaction, d = 0.65, P < 0.05; negative affect, d = 0.64, P < 0.05), and the majority of other safety and health outcomes changed in expected directions. Conclusions: COMPASS is a feasible intervention model for simultaneously preventing injuries and promoting health among home care workers.

The COMPASS pilot study: a total worker Health™ intervention for home care workers.

Background: Home care workers are a high-risk group for injury and illness. Their unique work structure presents challenges to delivering a program to enhance their health and safety. No randomized controlled trials have assessed the impact of a Total Worker Health™ program designed for their needs. Methods/design: The COMPASS (COMmunity of Practice And Safety Support) study is a cluster randomized trial being implemented among Oregon’s unionized home care workers. Partnering with the Oregon Home Care Commission allowed recruiting 10 pairs of home care worker groups with 8 participants per group (n = 160) for balanced randomization of groups to intervention and control conditions. Physiologic and survey evaluation of all participants will be at enrollment, 6 months and 12 months. Primary outcomes are to increase health promoting (for example, healthy nutrition and regular physical activity) and health protecting (that is, safety) behaviors. In addition to assessing outcomes adjusted for the hierarchical design, mediation analyses will be used to deconstruct and confirm the program’s theoretical underpinnings and intervention processes. Intervention groups will participate in a series of monthly 2-hour meetings designed as ritualized, scripted peer-led sessions to increase knowledge, practice skills and build support for healthy actions. Self-monitoring and individual and team level goals are included to augment change. Because generalizability, reach and achieving dissemination are priorities, following initial wave findings, a second wave of COMPASS groups will be recruited and enrolled with tailoring of the program to align with existing Home Care Commission educational offerings. Outcomes, process and mediation of those tailored groups will be compared with the original wave’ sf indings. Discussion: The COMPASS trial will assess a novel program to enhance the safety and health of a vulnerable, rapidly expanding group of isolated caregivers, whose critical work allows independent living of frail seniors and the disabled.

/pdf/the-community-of-practice-and-safety-support-compass-total-3684b35mko.pdf

The COMmunity of Practice And Safety Support (COMPASS) Total Worker Health™ study among home care workers: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

Annie Buckmaster

Papers

Safety and Health Support for Home Care Workers: The COMPASS Randomized Controlled Trial

The COMPASS pilot study: a total worker Health™ intervention for home care workers.

The COMmunity of Practice And Safety Support (COMPASS) Total Worker Health™ study among home care workers: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.