Beyond effectiveness in eHealth trials: process evaluation of a stepped-care programme to support healthcare workers with psychological distress (RESPOND-HCWs)

Mediavilla, Roberto, García-Vázquez, Blanca, McGreevy, Kerry R., Underhill, James, Bayón, Carmen, Bravo-Ortiz, María-Fe, Muñoz-Sanjosé, Ainoa, Haro, Josep Maria, Monistrol-Mula, Anna, Nicaise, Pablo, Petri-Romão, Papoula, McDaid, David ORCID: 0000-0003-0744-2664, Park, A-La ORCID: 0000-0002-4704-4874, Melchior, Maria, Vuillermoz, Cécile, Turrini, Giulia, Compri, Beatrice, Purgato, Marianna, Roos, Rinske, Witteveen, Anke B., Sijbrandij, Marit, Bryant, Richard A., Fuhr, Daniela and Ayuso-Mateos, José Luis (2024) Beyond effectiveness in eHealth trials: process evaluation of a stepped-care programme to support healthcare workers with psychological distress (RESPOND-HCWs). Digital Health, 10. ISSN 2055-2076

Text (mediavilla-et-al-2024-beyond-effectiveness-in-ehealth-trials-process-evaluation-of-a-stepped-care-programme-to-support) - Published Version Available under License Creative Commons Attribution. Download (1MB)

• Scopus publication
• https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177...

Abstract

Objectives: This study presents the process evaluation of an effective stepped-care programme of eHealth interventions (Doing What Matters in Times of Stress [DWM] and Problem Management Plus [PM+]) for healthcare workers (HCWs) with psychological distress (RESPOND-HCWs trial) conducted in Spain. The aim is to analyse the context in which the programme was delivered, assess key implementation outcomes and explore mechanisms of action. Methods: We used mixed methods. Quantitative data came from routine randomised control trial monitoring and structured observation, and qualitative data were collected using semi-structured, in-depth interviews with trial participants (n = 12) and decision-makers (n = 7) and a focus group discussion with intervention providers (n = 7). We conducted a descriptive analysis of quantitative data using R software and a thematic analysis of qualitative data using NVivo. Results: Context analysis revealed implementation barriers, including unrealistic expectations of participants about the programme and mental health-related stigma. The flexibility of interventions and the opportunity for mental health actions were enabling factors. Implementation outcomes showed that the trial was feasible, appropriate and timely, and that the intervention was delivered with minimal protocol deviations and good acceptance among participants. Mechanisms of action included confidence in the positive effect of the intervention, a good therapeutic relationship and specific intervention components. Conclusions: These results supplement the outcome evaluation and can help inform large-scale implementation in similar settings. Specific recommendations include increasing mental health awareness and reducing stigma in the implementation setting, including a short orientation session and ensuring flexibility in schedules and peer support. Trial registration number: NCT04980326.

Item Type:	Article
Additional Information:	© 2024 The Author(s)
Divisions:	Care Policy and Evaluation Centre
Subjects:	R Medicine > RA Public aspects of medicine > RA0421 Public health. Hygiene. Preventive Medicine B Philosophy. Psychology. Religion > BF Psychology
Date Deposited:	01 Nov 2024 11:27
Last Modified:	18 Nov 2024 11:54
URI:	http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/id/eprint/125937

Actions (login required)

View Item