IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v15y2018i7p1475-d157643.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Process Evaluation of an eHealth Intervention Implemented into General Practice: General Practitioners’ and Patients’ Views

Author

Listed:
  • Louise Poppe

    (Department of Movement and Sports Sciences, Ghent University, 9000 Gent, Belgium
    Department of Experimental Clinical and Health Psychology, Ghent University, 9000 Gent, Belgium)

  • Jolien Plaete

    (Department of Movement and Sports Sciences, Ghent University, 9000 Gent, Belgium)

  • Nele Huys

    (Department of Movement and Sports Sciences, Ghent University, 9000 Gent, Belgium)

  • Maïté Verloigne

    (Department of Movement and Sports Sciences, Ghent University, 9000 Gent, Belgium)

  • Myriam Deveugele

    (Department of General Practice and Primary Health Care, Ghent University, 9000 Gent, Belgium)

  • Ilse De Bourdeaudhuij

    (Department of Movement and Sports Sciences, Ghent University, 9000 Gent, Belgium)

  • Geert Crombez

    (Department of Experimental Clinical and Health Psychology, Ghent University, 9000 Gent, Belgium)

Abstract

(1) Background: It has been shown that online interventions can be enhanced by providing additional support; accordingly, we developed an implementation plan for the use of an eHealth intervention targeting physical activity and healthy nutrition in collaboration with general practitioners (GPs). In this study, GPs and patients evaluated the actual implementation; (2) Methods: Two hundred and thirty two patients completed the feasibility questionnaire regarding the implementation of “MyPlan 1.0” in general practice. Individual interviews were conducted with 15 GPs who implemented “MyPlan 1.0” into their daily work flow; (3) Results: The majority of the patients indicated that general practice was an appropriate setting to implement the online intervention. However, patients were not personally addressed by GPs and advice/action plans were not discussed with the GPs. The GPs indicated that this problem was caused by the severe time restrictions in general practice. GPs also seemed to select those patients who they believed to be able to use (e.g., highly educated patients) and to benefit from the intervention (e.g., patients with overweight); (4) Conclusions: Although GPs were involved in the development of the online intervention and its implementation plan, the programme was not used in general practice as intended.

Suggested Citation

  • Louise Poppe & Jolien Plaete & Nele Huys & Maïté Verloigne & Myriam Deveugele & Ilse De Bourdeaudhuij & Geert Crombez, 2018. "Process Evaluation of an eHealth Intervention Implemented into General Practice: General Practitioners’ and Patients’ Views," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(7), pages 1-12, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:15:y:2018:i:7:p:1475-:d:157643
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/15/7/1475/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/15/7/1475/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Glasgow, R.E. & Vogt, T.M. & Boles, S.M., 1999. "Evaluating the public health impact of health promotion interventions: The RE-AIM framework," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 89(9), pages 1322-1327.
    2. Laurent Degroote & Jolien Plaete & Ilse De Bourdeaudhuij & Maïté Verloigne & Vicky Van Stappen & An De Meester & Louise Poppe & Celien Van der Mispel & Geert Crombez, 2018. "The Effect of the eHealth Intervention ‘MyPlan 1.0’ on Physical Activity in Adults Who Visit General Practice: A Quasi-Experimental Trial," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(2), pages 1-13, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Pernille Ravn Jakobsen & Jeanette Reffstrup Christensen & Jesper Bo Nielsen & Jens Søndergaard & Dorte Ejg Jarbøl & Michael Hecht Olsen & Jens Steen Nielsen & Jette Kolding Kristensen & Carl J. Brandt, 2021. "Identification of Important Factors Affecting Use of Digital Individualised Coaching and Treatment of Type 2 Diabetes in General Practice: A Qualitative Feasibility Study," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(8), pages 1-13, April.
    2. Lingling Gao & Alina Dahmen & Franziska Maria Keller & Petra Becker & Sonia Lippke, 2021. "The Mediation Effect of Phobic Anxiety on the Treatment Outcome of Activity and Participation across Age: Comparison between Online and Face-to-Face Rehabilitation Aftercare of an RCT," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(20), pages 1-14, October.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Jungyoon Kim & Valerie Pacino & Hongmei Wang & April Recher & Isha Jain & Vaibhavi Mone & Jihyun Ma & Mary Jo Spurgin & Daniel Jeffrey & Stephen Mohring & Jane Potter, 2021. "System Redesign: The Value of a Primary Care Liaison Model to Address Unmet Social Needs among Older Primary Care Patients," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(21), pages 1-11, October.
    2. Gonot-Schoupinsky, Freda N. & Garip, Gulcan, 2019. "A flexible framework for planning and evaluating early-stage health interventions: FRAME-IT," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).
    3. Chelsea M. Cooper & Mary Drake & Justine A. Kavle & Joyce Nyoni & Ruth Lemwayi & Lemmy Mabuga & Anne Pfitzer & Mary Makungu & Elizabeth Massawe & John George, 2021. "Implementing a Novel Facility-Community Intervention for Strengthening Integration of Infant Nutrition and Family Planning in Mara and Kagera, Tanzania," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(8), pages 1-21, April.
    4. Francisco Javier de la Garza Iga & Marinés Mejía Alvarez & Joshua D Cockroft & Julia Rabin & Ana Cordón & Dina Maria Elias Rodas & Maria del Pilar Grazioso & Maria Espinola & Christine O’Dea & Ch, 2023. "Using the project ECHO™ model to teach mental health topics in rural Guatemala: An implementation science-guided evaluation," International Journal of Social Psychiatry, , vol. 69(8), pages 2031-2041, December.
    5. Eugenio Zucchelli & Andrew M Jones & Nigel Rice, 2012. "The evaluation of health policies through dynamic microsimulation methods," International Journal of Microsimulation, International Microsimulation Association, vol. 5(1), pages 2-20.
    6. Gabrielle Scronce & Wanqing Zhang & Matthew Lee Smith & Vicki Stemmons Mercer, 2020. "Characteristics Associated with Improved Physical Performance among Community-Dwelling Older Adults in a Community-Based Falls Prevention Program," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(7), pages 1-12, April.
    7. Saria Hassan & Alexis Cooke & Haneefa Saleem & Dorothy Mushi & Jessie Mbwambo & Barrot H. Lambdin, 2019. "Evaluating the Integrated Methadone and Anti-Retroviral Therapy Strategy in Tanzania Using the RE-AIM Framework," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(5), pages 1-15, February.
    8. Julie Cowie & Eileen Calveley & Gillian Bowers & John Bowers, 2018. "Evaluation of a Digital Consultation and Self-Care Advice Tool in Primary Care: A Multi-Methods Study," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(5), pages 1-23, May.
    9. Melissa D. Olfert & Rebecca L. Hagedorn & Makenzie L. Barr & Oluremi A. Famodu & Jessica M. Rubino & Jade A. White, 2018. "eB4CAST: An Evidence-Based Tool to Promote Dissemination and Implementation in Community-Based, Public Health Research," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(10), pages 1-13, September.
    10. Sebastian-Ion Ceptureanu & Eduard-Gabriel Ceptureanu & Mihai Cristian Orzan & Irinel Marin, 2017. "Toward a Romanian NPOs Sustainability Model: Determinants of Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(6), pages 1-26, June.
    11. Michelle Nichols & Ronald Teufel & Sarah Miller & Mohan Madisetti & Christine San Giovanni & Katherine Chike-Harris & Lacy Jones & Margaret Prentice & Kenneth Ruggiero & Teresa Kelechi, 2020. "Managing Asthma and Obesity Related Symptoms (MATADORS): An mHealth Intervention to Facilitate Symptom Self-Management among Youth," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(21), pages 1-15, October.
    12. Natalie Bradford & Shirley Chambers & Adrienne Hudson & Jacqui Jauncey‐Cooke & Robyn Penny & Carol Windsor & Patsy Yates, 2019. "Evaluation frameworks in health services: An integrative review of use, attributes and elements," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(13-14), pages 2486-2498, July.
    13. Seonad K. Madden & Helen Skouteris & Cate Bailey & Andrew P. Hills & Kiran D. K. Ahuja & Briony Hill, 2020. "Women in the Workplace: Promoting Healthy Lifestyles and Mitigating Weight Gain during the Preconception, Pregnancy, and Postpartum Periods," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(3), pages 1-7, January.
    14. Kristen C. Reilly & Patricia Tucker & Jennifer D. Irwin & Andrew M. Johnson & Erin S. Pearson & Dirk E. Bock & Shauna M. Burke, 2018. "“C.H.A.M.P. Families”: Description and Theoretical Foundations of a Paediatric Overweight and Obesity Intervention Targeting Parents—A Single-Centre Non-Randomised Feasibility Study," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(12), pages 1-23, December.
    15. Benjamin L. Robinson & Mike J. Clifford & Sarah Jewitt, 2021. "TIME to Change: An Evaluation of Practical Action Nepal’s Results Based Finance Program," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(10), pages 1-18, May.
    16. Floor A. van den Brand & Tessa Magnée & Lotte de Haan-Bouma & Cas Barendregt & Niels H. Chavannes & Onno C. P. van Schayck & Gera E. Nagelhout, 2019. "Implementation of Financial Incentives for Successful Smoking Cessation in Real-Life Company Settings: A Qualitative Needs Assessment among Employers," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(24), pages 1-16, December.
    17. Prosser, Brenton & Clark, Shannon & Davey, Rachel & Parker, Rhian, 2013. "Developing a public health policy-research nexus: An evaluation of Nurse Practitioner models in aged care," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 55-63.
    18. Currie, Melissa & King, Gillian & Rosenbaum, Peter & Law, Mary & Kertoy, Marilyn & Specht, Jacqueline, 2005. "A model of impacts of research partnerships in health and social services," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 28(4), pages 400-412, November.
    19. Holly Blake & Betsy Lai & Emil Coman & Jonathan Houdmont & Amanda Griffiths, 2019. "Move-It: A Cluster-Randomised Digital Worksite Exercise Intervention in China: Outcome and Process Evaluation," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(18), pages 1-23, September.
    20. Petra Boersma & Julia C M van Weert & Berno van Meijel & Rose‐Marie Dröes, 2017. "Implementation of the Veder contact method in daily nursing home care for people with dementia: a process analysis according to the RE‐AIM framework," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 26(3-4), pages 436-455, February.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:15:y:2018:i:7:p:1475-:d:157643. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.