Rapidly adapting an effective health promoting intervention for older adults-choose to move-for virtual delivery during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Adaptation
Implementation science
Physical activity
Seniors
Journal
BMC public health
ISSN: 1471-2458
Titre abrégé: BMC Public Health
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100968562
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
11 06 2022
11 06 2022
Historique:
received:
28
01
2022
accepted:
25
05
2022
entrez:
11
6
2022
pubmed:
12
6
2022
medline:
15
6
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The COVID-19 (COVID) pandemic shifted way of life for all Canadians. 'Stay-at-home' public health directives counter transmission of COVID but may cause, or exacerbate, older adults' physical and social health challenges. To counter unintentional consequences of these directives, we rapidly adapted an effective health promoting intervention for older adults-Choose to Move (CTM)-to be delivered virtually throughout British Columbia (BC). Our specific objectives were to 1. describe factors that influence whether implementation of CTM virtually was acceptable, and feasible to deliver, and 2. assess whether virtual delivery retained fidelity to CTM's core components. We conducted a 3-month rapid adaptation feasibility study to evaluate the implementation of CTM, virtually. Our evaluation targeted two levels of implementation within a larger socioeconomic continuum: 1. the prevention delivery system, and 2. older adult participants. We implemented 33 programs via Zoom during BC's 1st wave acute and transition stages of COVID (April-October 2020). We conducted semi-structured 30-45 min telephone focus groups with 9 activity coaches (who delivered CTM), and semi-structured 30-45 min telephone interviews with 30 older adult participants, at 0- and 3-months. We used deductive framework analysis for all qualitative data to identify themes. Activity coaches and older adults identified three key factors that influenced acceptability (a safe and supportive space to socially connect, the technological gateway, and the role of the central support unit) and two key factors that influenced feasibility (a virtual challenge worth taking on and CTM flexibility) of delivering CTM virtually. Activity coaches also reported adapting CTM during implementation; adaptations comprised two broad categories (time allocation and physical activity levels). It was feasible and acceptable to deliver CTM virtually. Programs such as CTM have potential to mitigate the unintended consequences of public health orders during COVID associated with reduced physical activity, social isolation, and loneliness. Adaptation and implementation strategies must be informed by community delivery partners and older adults themselves. Pragmatic, virtual health promoting interventions that can be adapted as contexts rapidly shift may forevermore be an essential part of our changing world.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
The COVID-19 (COVID) pandemic shifted way of life for all Canadians. 'Stay-at-home' public health directives counter transmission of COVID but may cause, or exacerbate, older adults' physical and social health challenges. To counter unintentional consequences of these directives, we rapidly adapted an effective health promoting intervention for older adults-Choose to Move (CTM)-to be delivered virtually throughout British Columbia (BC). Our specific objectives were to 1. describe factors that influence whether implementation of CTM virtually was acceptable, and feasible to deliver, and 2. assess whether virtual delivery retained fidelity to CTM's core components.
METHODS
We conducted a 3-month rapid adaptation feasibility study to evaluate the implementation of CTM, virtually. Our evaluation targeted two levels of implementation within a larger socioeconomic continuum: 1. the prevention delivery system, and 2. older adult participants. We implemented 33 programs via Zoom during BC's 1st wave acute and transition stages of COVID (April-October 2020). We conducted semi-structured 30-45 min telephone focus groups with 9 activity coaches (who delivered CTM), and semi-structured 30-45 min telephone interviews with 30 older adult participants, at 0- and 3-months. We used deductive framework analysis for all qualitative data to identify themes.
RESULTS
Activity coaches and older adults identified three key factors that influenced acceptability (a safe and supportive space to socially connect, the technological gateway, and the role of the central support unit) and two key factors that influenced feasibility (a virtual challenge worth taking on and CTM flexibility) of delivering CTM virtually. Activity coaches also reported adapting CTM during implementation; adaptations comprised two broad categories (time allocation and physical activity levels).
CONCLUSION
It was feasible and acceptable to deliver CTM virtually. Programs such as CTM have potential to mitigate the unintended consequences of public health orders during COVID associated with reduced physical activity, social isolation, and loneliness. Adaptation and implementation strategies must be informed by community delivery partners and older adults themselves. Pragmatic, virtual health promoting interventions that can be adapted as contexts rapidly shift may forevermore be an essential part of our changing world.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35690744
doi: 10.1186/s12889-022-13547-5
pii: 10.1186/s12889-022-13547-5
pmc: PMC9188419
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1172Informations de copyright
© 2022. The Author(s).
Références
J Biomed Inform. 2009 Apr;42(2):377-81
pubmed: 18929686
Glob Health Res Policy. 2020 Jun 5;5:27
pubmed: 32514427
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2013 Sep 18;13:117
pubmed: 24047204
Am J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2020 Oct;28(10):1046-1057
pubmed: 32713754
Front Public Health. 2021 May 31;9:663875
pubmed: 34136454
Implement Sci. 2013 Oct 02;8:117
pubmed: 24088228
Implement Sci Commun. 2021 Jun 29;2(1):70
pubmed: 34187595
Implement Sci. 2013 Jun 10;8:65
pubmed: 23758995
Prev Med. 2016 Aug;89:37-43
pubmed: 27196146
Front Public Health. 2020 Jul 21;8:403
pubmed: 32850605
J Phys Act Health. 2021 Feb 13;18(3):296-303
pubmed: 33581686
Perspect Psychol Sci. 2015 Mar;10(2):227-37
pubmed: 25910392
J Travel Med. 2020 Mar 13;27(2):
pubmed: 32052841
Clin Interv Aging. 2019 Jan 24;14:209-217
pubmed: 30774322
Lancet. 2016 Sep 24;388(10051):1311-24
pubmed: 27475266
J Nutr Health Aging. 2020;24(9):948-950
pubmed: 33155619
J Am Geriatr Soc. 2020 May;68(5):926-929
pubmed: 32255507
Health Promot Pract. 2005 Apr;6(2):134-47
pubmed: 15855283
PLoS Med. 2011 Jun;8(6):e1001049
pubmed: 21738450
Eur J Transl Myol. 2020 Jun 17;30(2):9069
pubmed: 32782767
Implement Sci. 2019 Dec 17;14(1):105
pubmed: 31847920
Exp Gerontol. 2020 Dec;142:111121
pubmed: 33132145
J Am Geriatr Soc. 2020 May;68(5):922-925
pubmed: 32207542
Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2019 Nov 7;16(1):102
pubmed: 31699095
J Prim Prev. 2012 Jun;33(2-3):137-52
pubmed: 22766606
Soc Sci Med. 2020 Aug;258:113087
pubmed: 32554229
Health Promot Int. 2020 Jun 1;35(3):445-448
pubmed: 32413111
Gerontologist. 2015 Oct;55(5):724-34
pubmed: 25165042
J Public Health Manag Pract. 2008 Mar-Apr;14(2):117-23
pubmed: 18287916
JAMA Intern Med. 2020 Jun 1;180(6):819-820
pubmed: 32297903
Gerontologist. 2016 Apr;56 Suppl 2:S268-80
pubmed: 26994266
Health Rep. 2019 Aug 21;30(8):3-10
pubmed: 31454407
Transl Behav Med. 2021 Mar 16;11(2):314-322
pubmed: 33447852
Prev Sci. 2004 Mar;5(1):41-5
pubmed: 15058911
Implement Sci. 2019 Jun 6;14(1):58
pubmed: 31171014
J Am Geriatr Soc. 2020 May;68(5):912-917
pubmed: 32212386
J Nutr Health Aging. 2020;24(3):243-245
pubmed: 32115602
Am J Community Psychol. 2008 Jun;41(3-4):327-50
pubmed: 18322790
J Appl Gerontol. 2020 Jul;39(7):687-689
pubmed: 32354249
BMC Public Health. 2016 Jan 25;16:73
pubmed: 26809451
Lancet. 2012 Jul 21;380(9838):247-57
pubmed: 22818937
Exp Aging Res. 2021 Oct-Dec;47(5):401-413
pubmed: 33827390
Gerontology. 2020;66(5):431-438
pubmed: 32585674
Am J Prev Med. 2008 Nov;35(5 Suppl):S381-9
pubmed: 18929985
Prev Sci. 2020 Apr;21(3):355-365
pubmed: 31916183
Health Psychol. 2009 May;28(3):354-63
pubmed: 19450042
Am J Community Psychol. 2008 Jun;41(3-4):171-81
pubmed: 18302018
J Gen Intern Med. 2006 Feb;21 Suppl 2:S1-8
pubmed: 16637954
Prev Sci. 2004 Mar;5(1):47-53
pubmed: 15058912
J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci. 2021 Feb 17;76(3):e99-e103
pubmed: 32672332
BMC Geriatr. 2018 Sep 15;18(1):214
pubmed: 30219034
J Prim Prev. 2013 Jun;34(3):193-207
pubmed: 23526141
Health Soc Care Community. 2022 Feb 13;:
pubmed: 35156247
BMC Public Health. 2019 Dec 3;19(1):1619
pubmed: 31795995
BMC Public Health. 2018 Nov 23;18(1):1289
pubmed: 30470209
BMC Health Serv Res. 2020 Mar 12;20(1):190
pubmed: 32164706
BMC Public Health. 2021 Feb 6;21(1):312
pubmed: 33549090
Eur Rev Aging Phys Act. 2020 Sep 23;17:16
pubmed: 32983273
J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci. 2021 Jan 18;76(2):e53-e58
pubmed: 32778899
Geriatrics (Basel). 2021 Mar 22;6(1):
pubmed: 33810155
Adm Policy Ment Health. 2015 Sep;42(5):533-44
pubmed: 24193818
Aging Ment Health. 2013;17(1):40-7
pubmed: 22913477
Adm Policy Ment Health. 2011 Mar;38(2):65-76
pubmed: 20957426
J Med Internet Res. 2014 Dec 04;16(12):e265
pubmed: 25486673
J Prim Prev. 2013 Jun;34(3):147-61
pubmed: 23605294
Health Soc Care Community. 2018 Mar;26(2):147-157
pubmed: 27413007
Geriatr Nurs. 2021 Sep-Oct;42(5):1222-1229
pubmed: 33824008