Suppr超能文献

一项提高学校行为预防实践培训和咨询效果的实施前增强策略:一项三盲随机对照试验。

A Pre-Implementation Enhancement Strategy to Increase the Yield of Training and Consultation for School-Based Behavioral Preventive Practices: a Triple-Blind Randomized Controlled Trial.

机构信息

Department of Psychological & Quantitative Foundations, University of Iowa, 361 Lindquist Center, Iowa City, IA, 52242, USA.

Department of Educational Psychology, University of Minnesota, 341 Education Sciences Building, 56 East River Road, Minneapolis, MN, 55455, USA.

出版信息

Prev Sci. 2023 Apr;24(3):552-566. doi: 10.1007/s11121-022-01464-3. Epub 2022 Nov 11.

Abstract

As the most common setting where youth access behavioral healthcare, the education sector frequently employs training and follow-up consultation as cornerstone implementation strategies to promote the implementation of evidence-based practices (EBPs). However, these strategies alone are not sufficient to promote desirable implementation (e.g., intervention fidelity) and youth behavioral outcomes (e.g., mitigated externalizing behaviors). Theory-informed pragmatic pre-implementation enhancement strategies (PIES) are needed to prevent the lackluster outcomes of training and consultation. Specifically, social cognitive theory explicates principles that inform the design of PIES content and specify mechanisms of behavior change (e.g., "intentions to implement" (ITI)) to target increasing providers' responsiveness to training and consultation. This triple-blind parallel randomized controlled trial preliminarily examined the efficacy of a pragmatic PIES based on social cognitive theories (SC-PIES) to improve implementation and youth behavioral outcomes from universal preventive EBPs in the education sector. Teachers from a diverse urban district were recruited and randomly assigned to the treatment (SC-PIES; n = 22) or active control condition (administrative meeting; n = 21). Based on the condition assigned, teachers received the SC-PIES or met with administrators before their EBP training. We assessed teachers' ITI, intervention fidelity, and youth behavioral outcome (academic engagement as an incompatible behavior to externalizing disorders) at baseline, immediately after training, and 6 weeks afterward. A series of ANCOVAs detected sizeable effects of SC-PIES, where teachers who received SC-PIES demonstrated significantly larger improvement in their ITI, intervention fidelity, and youth behaviors as compared to the control. Conditional analyses indicated that teachers' ITI partially mediated the effect of SC-PIES on intervention fidelity, which in turn led to improved youth behaviors. Findings suggest that theory-informed pragmatic PIES targeting providers' ITI can boost their responsiveness to implementation strategies, as reflected in improved implementation behaviors and youth behavioral outcomes. The results have implications for targeting motivational mechanisms of behavior change and situating preventive implementation strategies at the intersection between the preparation and active implementation stages of an implementation process. Limitations and implications for research and practice are discussed. Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT05240222. Registered on: 2/14/2022. Retrospectively registered.  https://clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT05240222.

摘要

作为青少年获得行为健康护理的最常见场所,教育部门经常采用培训和后续咨询作为基石实施策略,以促进基于证据的实践(EBP)的实施。然而,仅这些策略不足以促进理想的实施(例如,干预保真度)和青少年的行为结果(例如,减轻外化行为)。需要基于理论的务实预实施增强策略(PIES)来防止培训和咨询的结果不尽如人意。具体来说,社会认知理论阐述了设计 PIES 内容的原则,并指定了行为改变的机制(例如,“实施意向”(ITI)),以针对提高提供者对培训和咨询的响应能力。这项三盲平行随机对照试验初步检验了基于社会认知理论的务实 PIES(SC-PIES)提高教育部门普遍预防 EBP 的实施和青少年行为结果的功效。从一个多元化的城市地区招募教师,并随机分配到治疗组(SC-PIES;n=22)或对照组(行政会议;n=21)。根据分配的条件,教师在接受 EBP 培训之前接受 SC-PIES 或与管理人员会面。我们在基线、培训后立即和 6 周后评估了教师的 ITI、干预保真度和青少年行为结果(学业参与作为外化障碍的不兼容行为)。一系列协方差分析检测到 SC-PIES 的显著效果,接受 SC-PIES 的教师在 ITI、干预保真度和青少年行为方面的改善明显大于对照组。条件分析表明,教师的 ITI 部分中介了 SC-PIES 对干预保真度的影响,进而导致青少年行为的改善。研究结果表明,针对提供者 ITI 的基于理论的务实 PIES 可以提高他们对实施策略的响应能力,这反映在改进的实施行为和青少年行为结果上。研究结果对于针对行为改变的动机机制以及将预防实施策略定位在实施过程的准备和积极实施阶段之间具有重要意义。讨论了研究和实践的局限性和意义。临床Trials.gov:NCT05240222。于 2022 年 2 月 14 日注册。回顾性注册。https://clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT05240222。

相似文献

5
Examining the Effects of a Brief, Group-Based Motivational Implementation Strategy on Mechanisms of Teacher Behavior Change.
Prev Sci. 2021 Aug;22(6):722-736. doi: 10.1007/s11121-020-01191-7. Epub 2020 Nov 23.
8
Strategies for enhancing the implementation of school-based policies or practices targeting risk factors for chronic disease.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Nov 29;11(11):CD011677. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011677.pub2.

引用本文的文献

1
Implementation Science in School Mental Health: A 10-Year Progress Update and Development of a New Research Agenda.
School Ment Health. 2024 Dec;16(4):1013-1037. doi: 10.1007/s12310-024-09731-0. Epub 2024 Nov 12.
2
School-Based Mental Health Interventions: Recommendations for Selecting and Reporting Implementation Strategies.
J Sch Health. 2024 Jun;94(6):581-585. doi: 10.1111/josh.13458. Epub 2024 Apr 16.
4
Harnessing the Single-Session Intervention approach to promote scalable implementation of evidence-based practices in healthcare.
Front Health Serv. 2022 Sep 23;2:997406. doi: 10.3389/frhs.2022.997406. eCollection 2022.
5
Understanding the Role of Clinical Champions and Their Impact on Clinician Behavior Change: The Need for Causal Pathway Mechanisms.
Front Health Serv. 2022 Jul 13;2:896885. doi: 10.3389/frhs.2022.896885. eCollection 2022.

本文引用的文献

3
Statistical analysis of two arm randomized pre-post designs with one post-treatment measurement.
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2021 Jul 24;21(1):150. doi: 10.1186/s12874-021-01323-9.
4
Participation bias, self-selection bias, and response bias.
J Am Acad Dermatol. 2021 Jun 18. doi: 10.1016/j.jaad.2021.06.025.
5
Examining the Effects of a Brief, Group-Based Motivational Implementation Strategy on Mechanisms of Teacher Behavior Change.
Prev Sci. 2021 Aug;22(6):722-736. doi: 10.1007/s11121-020-01191-7. Epub 2020 Nov 23.
8
Controlling type I error rates in multi-arm clinical trials: A case for the false discovery rate.
Pharm Stat. 2021 Jan;20(1):109-116. doi: 10.1002/pst.2059. Epub 2020 Aug 12.
10
Cluster over individual randomization: are study design choices appropriately justified? Review of a random sample of trials.
Clin Trials. 2020 Jun;17(3):253-263. doi: 10.1177/1740774519896799. Epub 2020 May 5.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验