Ellard, David R., Taylor, Stephanie J. C., Parsons, Suzanne and Thorogood, Margaret. (2011) The OPERA trial : a protocol for the process evaluation of a randomised trial of an exercise intervention for older people in residential and nursing accommodation. Trials, Vol.12 (No.28). ISSN 1745-6215

PDF WRAP_Thorogood_OPERA_Trial.pdf - Requires a PDF viewer such as GSview, Xpdf or Adobe Acrobat Reader Download (284Kb)

Abstract

Background: The OPERA trial is large cluster randomised trial testing a physical activity intervention to address depression amongst people living in nursing and residential homes for older people. A process evaluation was commissioned alongside the trial and we report the protocol for this process evaluation. Challenges included the cognitive and physical ability of the participants, the need to respect the privacy of all home residents, including study non-participants, and the physical structure of the homes. Evaluation activity had to be organised around the structured timetable of homes, leaving limited opportunities for data collection. The aims of this process evaluation are to provide findings that will assist in the interpretation of the clinical trial results, and to inform potential implementation of the physical activity intervention on a wider scale. Methods/design: Quantitative data on recruitment of homes and individuals is being collected. For homes in the intervention arm, data on dose and fidelity of the intervention delivered; including individual rates of participation in exercise classes are collected. In the control homes, uptake and delivery of depression awareness training is monitored. These data will be combined with qualitative data from an in-depth study of a purposive sample of eight homes (six intervention and two control). Discussion: Although process evaluations are increasingly funded alongside trials, it is still rare to see the findings published, and even rarer to see the protocol for such an evaluation published. Process evaluations have the potential to assist in interpreting and understanding trial results as well as informing future roll-outs of interventions. If such evaluations are funded they should also be reported and reviewed in a similar way to the trial outcome evaluation.

Item Type:	Journal Article
Subjects:	R Medicine > RA Public aspects of medicine R Medicine > RC Internal medicine
Divisions:	Faculty of Medicine > Warwick Medical School > Health Sciences Faculty of Medicine > Warwick Medical School
Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH):	Depression in old age -- Treatment, Exercise for older people, Old age homes
Journal or Publication Title:	Trials
Publisher:	BioMed Central Ltd.
ISSN:	1745-6215
Date:	2 February 2011
Volume:	Vol.12
Number:	No.28
Identification Number:	10.1186/1745-6215-12-28
Status:	Peer Reviewed
Access rights to Published version:	Open Access
Funder:	National Institute for Health Research (Great Britain) (NIHR), NHS R & D HTA Programme (Great Britain) (HTA), Advantage West Midlands (AWM), Birmingham Science City
Grant number:	06/02/01 (HTA)
References:	1. Underwood M, et al: Protocol for the OPERA trial: a randomised trial of an exercise intervention for older people in residential and nursing accommodation. [ISRCTN No: 43769277]. BMC Trials 2010, 12:27. 2. Szczepura A, Clay D, Hyde J, Nelson S, Wild D: Models for providing improved care in residential care homes: a thematic literature review. WRAP Warwick Research Archive Project; 2008 [http://wrap.warwick.ac.uk/ 438/]. 3. Matthews FE, Dening T: Prevalence of dementia in institutional care. The Lancet 2002, 360:225-226. 4. Cohen D, Crabtree B: Qualitative Research Guidelines Project. Robert Wood Jonhson Foundation; 2006 [http://www.qualres.org/]. 5. Steckler A, Linnan L, (Eds.): Process Evaluation for Public Health Interventions and Research. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass; 2002. 6. Weiss CH: Evaluation research Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall; 1972. 7. Weiss CH: Nothing as Practical as a Good Theory: Exploring Theorybased Evaluation in Complex Community Initiatives for Children and Families. In New Approaches to Evaluating Community Initiatives. Edited by: Connell J, Kubish A, Schorr L, Weiss CH. Washington, DC Aspen Institute; 1995. 8. Weiss CH: How can theory-based evaluation make greater headway? Evaluation Review 1997, 21:501-524. 9. Bryman A: Integrating quantitative and qualitative research: how is it done? Qualitative Research 2006, 6:97-113. 10. Pope C, Mays N: Qualitative Research: Reaching the parts other methods cannot reach: an introduction to qualitative methods in health and health services research. BMJ 1995, 311:42-45. 11. Oakley A, Strange V, Bonell C, Allen E, Stephenson J: Process evaluation in randomised controlled trials of complex interventions. BMJ 2006, 332:413-416. 12. Oakley A, Strange V, Stephenson J, Forrest S, Monteiro H: Evaluating Processes: A Case Study of a Randomized Controlled Trial of Sex Education. Evaluation 2004, 10:440-462. 13. Morgan DL: Practical Strategies for Combining Qualitative and Quantitative Methods: Applications to Health Research. Qual Health Res 1998, 8:362-376. 14. McKee KJ, Houston DM, Barnes S: Methods for Assessing Quality of Life and Well-Being in Frail Older People. Psychology and Health 2002, 17:737-751. 15. Parker C, Barnes S, McKee K, Morgan K, Torrington J, Tregenza P: Quality of life and building design in residential and nursing homes for older people. Ageing & Society 2004, 24:941-962. 16. NVivo qualitative data analysis software. QSR International Pty Ltd; 2006, Version 7. 17. PASW Statistics 18.0:: Predictive Analytics SoftWare Statistics (Version 18). SPSS inc; 2009.
URI:	http://wrap.warwick.ac.uk/id/eprint/4282

Data sourced from Thomson Reuters' Web of Knowledge

Request changes to a record

Actions (login required)

View Item