A mixed methods process evaluation of a peer coaching intervention to improve the implementation of preventive tasks by occupational physicians
Orhan Pees, S.; van Oostrom, S.; Schaafsma, F.; Proper, K.
Show abstract
ObjectivesThis study aimed to evaluate the process of implementation of a peer coaching intervention program for occupational physicians (OPs) to improve the execution of preventive tasks. Specifically, the evaluation seeks to: (1) describe the reach and uptake of the intervention program; (2) determine the extent to which the program was implemented as intended; (3) provide insights into experiences of OPs, and (4) identify factors influencing the implementation. MethodsThis study employed a mixed-methods approach to assess seven main process indicators: acceptability, adoption, appropriateness, feasibility, fidelity, penetration and sustainability. Data were collected between March and June 2024 by means of an online questionnaire (N=98), and 17 semi-structured interviews with group coordinators and OPs. Results20 out of 21 groups allocated to the intervention program participated in the intervention and 98 out of 115 participants (85%) filled in the questionnaire. Three-quarters of the participants completed the entire program. 96% of the OPs successfully discussed barriers to the execution of preventive tasks, and 83% were able to formulate strategies for these barriers. Most participants managed to implement their formulated goals in practice. When they were unable to do so, time constraints and resistance from employers and their occupational health services often played a role. OPs valued the programs structure, interaction with colleagues, and the increased awareness it generated. Discussion and conclusionThe peer coaching group program was well-implemented and positively evaluated by OPs. The program can be improved by allocating more time to it, for instance by integrating it into the educational curriculum, and by paying more attention to the specific working conditions of OPs, such as the different sectors in which they are employed. Trial registration: ISRCTN registry; ISRCTN15394765. Registered on 27 June 2023.
Matching journals
The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Intentional and unintentional non-adherence to social distancing measures during COVID-19: A mixed-methods analysis 95%
- Using a design-based research approach to develop a technology-supported physical education course to increase the physical activity levels of university students: Study protocol paper 94%
- Process of Use of Evidence Products by Frontline Maternal, Newborn and Child Health Staff at the Facility Level in Ghana. 94%
Similar papers in this journal
- How should job crafting interventions be implemented to make their effects last? Study protocol of group concept mapping 96%
- Impostor Phenomenon in the Nutrition and Dietetics Profession: An Online Cross-Sectional Survey 93%
- The Acceptability of a Tobacco Dependency Treatment for NHS Staff in the North East of England: A Mixed-Methods Study 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- Experiences of supported isolation in returning travellers during the early COVID-19 response: an interview study 94%
- Taking a participatory research approach within workplace health promotion research to improve physical activity levels in office-based workers: a scoping review protocol 94%
- Key factors for effective implementation of healthcare workers support interventions in health organisations after patient safety incidents: a protocol for a scoping review 94%
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
- ‘Leading from the front’ implementation strategies increase the success of influenza vaccination drives among healthcare workers: A reanalysis of Systematic Review evidence using Intervention Component Analysis (ICA) and Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) 93%
- A Systematic Review: The Dimensions and Indicators utilized in the Performance Evaluation of Health Care Organizations- An Implication during COVID-19 Pandemic 92%
- Implementation strategies for telemental health: a systematic review 92%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.