Health PromotionSCSNCT02299895
Professionals' Perspectives on Facilitating and Hindering Factors of Implementing Health Promotion Programs in Organizational Settings
An observational study of Health Promotion and Organizations, run by Ludwig Boltzmann Gesellschaft.
Trial summary
Background: In the field of health promotion, the 'setting approach' has gained increased attention over the last decades. Following this approach, organizations and governments are urged to invest in health and health promotion. However, the dissatisfaction with the broad definition of the term 'setting' has grown. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Any ageHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Health Promotion, Organizations
- How many people
- 90 participants
- Where
- No sites listed yet
- Study dates
- Feb 2012to Mar 2015
- Phase
- Observational
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages Any age
- All sexes
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Child, Adult, Older adult
Study population: The aim of this study is to investigate professionals' (teachers', health professionals', care aids') views and attitudes that influence the implementation of client-oriented health promotion programs in organizational settings in Austria. Therefore, 90 professionals will be interviewed: 30 in schools, 30 in hospitals, and 30 in LTC-facilities.
Who may be able to join
- Professionals from different levels of the organizational hierarchies
- Professionals from different professional groups
- Professionals with preferably differing views on the usefulness of the health promotion program
Who cannot join
- -
About this study
Official title: Professionals' Perspectives on Facilitating and Hindering Factors of Implementing Health Promotion Programs in Organizational Settings: a Qualitative Comparative Study in Austria
Background:
In the field of health promotion, the 'setting approach' has gained increased attention over the last decades. Following this approach, organizations and governments are urged to invest in health and health promotion. However, the dissatisfaction with the broad definition of the term 'setting' has grown. As many health promotion programs are carried out in organizational settings, substantial work has been done on how to acknowledge organizational factors in designing and implementing health promotion programs. Organizational settings differ from others because they can also address their clients as beneficiaries of health promotion programs, also known as 'client-oriented health promotion'. Among the most prominent organizational settings for health promotion are schools and hospitals, and more recently, long-term care (LTC-) facilities. However, dissemination and implementation of client-oriented health promotion in organizational settings seem to be very challenging. Most approaches dealing with barriers to health promotion implementation in schools, hospitals, and LTC-facilities rarely reflect the specific organizational characteristics. This negligence constitutes both, a research gap in the setting approach and in the design of health promotion practice. Hence, the aim of this study is to explore professionals' (teachers', health professionals', care aids') views and attitudes that influence the implementation of client-oriented health promotion programs between schools, hospitals, and LTC-facilities in Austria.
Read more
Methods:
With that aim in mind, the investigators chose a comparative qualitative design. Semi-structured interviews will be conducted with 90 professionals (30 in schools, 30 in hospitals, and 30 in LTC-facilities). In addition, non-participant observations as well as an extensive document analysis in each setting will be undertaken. The data will be analyzed by thematic analysis. Comparisons within as well as between the organizational settings will be conducted using selected categories.
Discussion:
To date, this study is the first of its kind that compares results of individual semi-structured interviews between different organizational settings. This study investigates professionals' views and attitudes on facilitating and hindering factors of implementing client-oriented health promotion programs and thus will provide a solid basis for future research activities and evaluation studies in the field of health promotion implementation.
- Conditions
- Health Promotion, Organizations
- Keywords
- setting approach, health promotion, organization, implementation research, qualitative study, comparison
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Professionals' perspectives towards the implementation process of health promotion programs compositely measured by qualitative semi-structured interviews and non-participant observation
Semi-structured interviews: During different stages of the implementation process, a number of professionals responsible for implementation in each organizational setting are invited for an in-depth interview to gain insight into the implementation of the health promotion program. An interview guide is used to ask participants about the program's content, recruitment, fidelity, and satisfaction with the dissemination strategy, and overall satisfaction with the health promotion program. Facilitators and barriers for implementation, as well as intentions and opportunities for future implementation of health promotion programs are discussed.
Non-participant observation: In addition, it is observed how professionals across schools, hospitals, and LTC-facilities implement the health promotion program. Non-participant observation is conducted two times in each organizational setting.
Measured: 9 months
Secondary outcomes (1)
Investigation of formal prerequisites of the implementation process measured by extensive document analysis
Documentary data, such as organizational charts or program descriptions of the health promotion programs, are gathered. Therewith, the investigators analyze formal structures and processes within the organizations as well as the formal requirements and goals of the health promotion program.
Measured: 9 months
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted24 Nov 2014 (estimated)
- Study startFeb 2012
- Primary completionMar 2015 (estimated)
- Study completionMar 2015 (estimated)
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for Health PromotionStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Observational
- Time perspective
- Retrospective
- Enrolment
- 90 participants (estimated)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Ludwig Boltzmann Gesellschaft
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Ludwig Boltzmann Institut Health Promotion Research
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Wolfgang Dür, Ludwig Boltzmann Gesellschaft
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02299895
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- LBG:1554
- Acronym
- SCS
- Status last verified
- Nov 2014
- First submitted
- 13 Nov 2014
- Last updated
- 24 Nov 2014
- Results posted
- No
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 24 Nov 2014. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Professionals' Perspectives on Facilitating and Hindering Factors of Implementing Health Promotion Programs in Organizational Settings: a Qualitative Comparative Study in Austria
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02299895
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- SCS / LBG:1554
- Conditions
- Health Promotion, Organizations
- Keywords
- setting approach, health promotion, organization, implementation research, qualitative study, comparison
- Study type
- Observational
- Recruitment status
- Unknown status
- Enrolment
- 90 participants (estimated)
- Lead sponsor
- Ludwig Boltzmann GesellschaftUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Ludwig Boltzmann Institut Health Promotion Research
- Study start
- Feb 2012
- Primary completion
- Mar 2015 (estimated)
- Study completion
- Mar 2015 (estimated)
- First posted
- 24 Nov 2014 (estimated)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
Background:
In the field of health promotion, the 'setting approach' has gained increased attention over the last decades. Following this approach, organizations and governments are urged to invest in health and health promotion. However, the dissatisfaction with the broad definition of the term 'setting' has grown. As many health promotion programs are carried out in organizational settings, substantial work has been done on how to acknowledge organizational factors in designing and implementing health promotion programs. Organizational settings differ from others because they can also address their clients as beneficiaries of health promotion programs, also known as 'client-oriented health promotion'. Among the most prominent organizational settings for health promotion are schools and hospitals, and more recently, long-term care (LTC-) facilities. However, dissemination and implementation of client-oriented health promotion in organizational settings seem to be very challenging. Most approaches dealing with barriers to health promotion implementation in schools, hospitals, and LTC-facilities rarely reflect the specific organizational characteristics. This negligence constitutes both, a research gap in the setting approach and in the design of health promotion practice. Hence, the aim of this study is to explore professionals' (teachers', health professionals', care aids') views and attitudes that influence the implementation of client-oriented health promotion programs between schools, hospitals, and LTC-facilities in Austria.
Methods:
With that aim in mind, the investigators chose a comparative qualitative design. Semi-structured interviews will be conducted with 90 professionals (30 in schools, 30 in hospitals, and 30 in LTC-facilities). In addition, non-participant observations as well as an extensive document analysis in each setting will be undertaken. The data will be analyzed by thematic analysis. Comparisons within as well as between the organizational settings will be conducted using selected categories.
Discussion:
To date, this study is the first of its kind that compares results of individual semi-structured interviews between different organizational settings. This study investigates professionals' views and attitudes on facilitating and hindering factors of implementing client-oriented health promotion programs and thus will provide a solid basis for future research activities and evaluation studies in the field of health promotion implementation.
Study design
- Time perspective
- Retrospective
Who may qualify
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Child, Adult, Older adult
- Study population
- The aim of this study is to investigate professionals' (teachers', health professionals', care aids') views and attitudes that influence the implementation of client-oriented health promotion programs in organizational settings in Austria. Therefore, 90 professionals will be interviewed: 30 in schools, 30 in hospitals, and 30 in LTC-facilities.
Key inclusion criteria (3 listed)
- Professionals from different levels of the organizational hierarchies
- Professionals from different professional groups
- Professionals with preferably differing views on the usefulness of the health promotion program
Key exclusion criteria (1 listed)
- -
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Primary outcome
Professionals' perspectives towards the implementation process of health promotion programs compositely measured by qualitative semi-structured interviews and non-participant observation
Time frame: 9 months
Semi-structured interviews: During different stages of the implementation process, a number of professionals responsible for implementation in each organizational setting are invited for an in-depth interview to gain insight into the implementation of the health promotion program. An interview guide is used to ask participants about the program's content, recruitment, fidelity, and satisfaction with the dissemination strategy, and overall satisfaction with the health promotion program. Facilitators and barriers for implementation, as well as intentions and opportunities for future implementation of health promotion programs are discussed. Non-participant observation: In addition, it is observed how professionals across schools, hospitals, and LTC-facilities implement the health promotion program. Non-participant observation is conducted two times in each organizational setting.
1 secondary outcome
Investigation of formal prerequisites of the implementation process measured by extensive document analysis
Time frame: 9 months
Results and safety
Results are not available in the source record.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 24 Nov 2014.
Related trials for Health Promotion
Active, not recruiting
Designing and Evaluating a Classroom-Based Mental Health Programme for Adolescents.
Mental Health Promotion
Active, not recruiting
Economic Empowerment and Health Promotion of Uganda Grandmother-caregivers.
Financial Burden, Health Behavior
Active, not recruiting
Personalized Mobile Health Platform to Promote Physical Activity in Adolescents and Young Adults With Cystic Fibrosis
Cystic Fibrosis (CF)
RecruitingObservational study
A Multilevel Approach to Connecting Underrepresented Populations to Clinical Trials
Cancer
Not yet recruiting
Game-based Oral Health Promotion
Oral Hygiene
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
The record lists no contact. Use the official record to reach the sponsor.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
An observational study of Health Promotion and Organizations, run by Ludwig Boltzmann Gesellschaft.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 3 inclusion and 1 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: status not confirmed, as of the sponsor's last update on 24 Nov 2014. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
Results are not available in the source record.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Professionals' perspectives towards the implementation process of health promotion programs compositely measured by qualitative semi-structured interviews and non-participant observation (time frame: 9 months). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 24 Nov 2014.