Limits...
Development of a self-management program for employees with complaints of the arm, neck, and/or shoulder: an intervention mapping approach.

Hutting N, Detaille SI, Engels JA, Heerkens YF, Staal JB, Nijhuis-van der Sanden MW - J Multidiscip Healthc (2015)

Bottom Line: Step 3 described how the intervention methods were translated into practical strategies, and goal setting was introduced as an important method for increasing self-efficacy.The product of Step 4 was the final program plan, consisting of 6-weekly group sessions of 2.5 hours each and an eHealth module.In Step 5, a recruitment plan and course materials were developed, a steering committee was set up, trainers were recruited, and the final program was tested.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Radboud University Medical Center, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, the Scientific Institute for Quality of Healthcare, Nijmegen, the Netherlands ; Hogeschool van Arnhem en Nijmegen (HAN) University of Applied Sciences, Faculty of Health and Social Studies, Research Group Occupation and Health, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.

ABSTRACT

Purpose: To develop a self-management program with an additional eHealth module, using the six steps of the intervention mapping (IM) protocol, to help employees with complaints of the arm, neck, and/or shoulder (CANS) cope with their problems.

Methods: In Step 1 of the IM protocol, a needs assessment was performed consisting of a review of the Dutch multidisciplinary guidelines on CANS, and of focus group sessions with employees with CANS (n=15) and with relevant experts (n=17). After the needs assessment, the objectives of the intervention and the determinants of self-management at work were formulated (Step 2). Furthermore, theory-based intervention methods and practical strategies were selected (Step 3), and an intervention program (including the eHealth module) was developed (Step 4). Finally, plans for implementation and evaluation of the program were developed (Steps 5 and 6).

Results: Step 1 of the IM protocol revealed that employees with CANS should be stimulated to search for information about the cause of their complaints, about how to deal with their complaints, and in which manner they can influence their complaints themselves. In Step 2, the overall goal of the intervention was defined as "self-management behavior at work" with the aim to alleviate the perceived disability of the participants. Step 3 described how the intervention methods were translated into practical strategies, and goal setting was introduced as an important method for increasing self-efficacy. The product of Step 4 was the final program plan, consisting of 6-weekly group sessions of 2.5 hours each and an eHealth module. In Step 5, a recruitment plan and course materials were developed, a steering committee was set up, trainers were recruited, and the final program was tested. In Step 6, an evaluation plan was developed, which consists of a randomized controlled trial with a 12-month follow-up period and a qualitative evaluation (interviews) with some of the participants.

Conclusion: This study resulted in a theory- and practice-based self-management program, based on behavioral change theories, guideline-related evidence, and practice-based knowledge that fits the needs of employees with CANS.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

Model representing how the adapted self-management program can influence determinants of self-management behavior at work, including the impact of barriers, knowledge, and skills.Note: Based on the Attitude–Social influence–Efficacy (ASE) Model28 and adapted from Detaille SI, van der Gulden JW, Engels JA, et al. Using intervention mapping (IM) to develop a self-management programme for employees with a chronic disease in the Netherlands. BMC Public Health. 2010;10:353.14Abbreviation: CANS, complaints of the arm, neck, and/or shoulder.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4492641&req=5

f2-jmdh-8-307: Model representing how the adapted self-management program can influence determinants of self-management behavior at work, including the impact of barriers, knowledge, and skills.Note: Based on the Attitude–Social influence–Efficacy (ASE) Model28 and adapted from Detaille SI, van der Gulden JW, Engels JA, et al. Using intervention mapping (IM) to develop a self-management programme for employees with a chronic disease in the Netherlands. BMC Public Health. 2010;10:353.14Abbreviation: CANS, complaints of the arm, neck, and/or shoulder.

Mentions: The purpose of Step 2 was to provide the basis for the intervention by specifying the behavioral change objectives of the intervention.23 To analyze the determinants of self-management behavior at work, the Attitude–Social influence–Efficacy (ASE) Model28 (comparable to the theory of planned behavior29–31) was used. This model postulates that intention, the most proximal determinant of behavior, is determined by three independent constructs: attitude, social influence, and perceived behavioral control (self-efficacy).14 A model representing how the intervention can influence the determinants of self-management behavior at work, including the impact of barriers, knowledge, and skills,14 is presented in Figure 2. The behavioral change objectives of the intervention were formulated on the level of determinants of behavior (attitude, social influence, and self-efficacy), which influence the experienced problems of employees with CANS. The product of Step 2 was a set of matrices of change objectives for personal and environmental determinants, ie, the most immediate target of an intervention.23


Development of a self-management program for employees with complaints of the arm, neck, and/or shoulder: an intervention mapping approach.

Hutting N, Detaille SI, Engels JA, Heerkens YF, Staal JB, Nijhuis-van der Sanden MW - J Multidiscip Healthc (2015)

Model representing how the adapted self-management program can influence determinants of self-management behavior at work, including the impact of barriers, knowledge, and skills.Note: Based on the Attitude–Social influence–Efficacy (ASE) Model28 and adapted from Detaille SI, van der Gulden JW, Engels JA, et al. Using intervention mapping (IM) to develop a self-management programme for employees with a chronic disease in the Netherlands. BMC Public Health. 2010;10:353.14Abbreviation: CANS, complaints of the arm, neck, and/or shoulder.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4492641&req=5

f2-jmdh-8-307: Model representing how the adapted self-management program can influence determinants of self-management behavior at work, including the impact of barriers, knowledge, and skills.Note: Based on the Attitude–Social influence–Efficacy (ASE) Model28 and adapted from Detaille SI, van der Gulden JW, Engels JA, et al. Using intervention mapping (IM) to develop a self-management programme for employees with a chronic disease in the Netherlands. BMC Public Health. 2010;10:353.14Abbreviation: CANS, complaints of the arm, neck, and/or shoulder.
Mentions: The purpose of Step 2 was to provide the basis for the intervention by specifying the behavioral change objectives of the intervention.23 To analyze the determinants of self-management behavior at work, the Attitude–Social influence–Efficacy (ASE) Model28 (comparable to the theory of planned behavior29–31) was used. This model postulates that intention, the most proximal determinant of behavior, is determined by three independent constructs: attitude, social influence, and perceived behavioral control (self-efficacy).14 A model representing how the intervention can influence the determinants of self-management behavior at work, including the impact of barriers, knowledge, and skills,14 is presented in Figure 2. The behavioral change objectives of the intervention were formulated on the level of determinants of behavior (attitude, social influence, and self-efficacy), which influence the experienced problems of employees with CANS. The product of Step 2 was a set of matrices of change objectives for personal and environmental determinants, ie, the most immediate target of an intervention.23

Bottom Line: Step 3 described how the intervention methods were translated into practical strategies, and goal setting was introduced as an important method for increasing self-efficacy.The product of Step 4 was the final program plan, consisting of 6-weekly group sessions of 2.5 hours each and an eHealth module.In Step 5, a recruitment plan and course materials were developed, a steering committee was set up, trainers were recruited, and the final program was tested.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Radboud University Medical Center, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, the Scientific Institute for Quality of Healthcare, Nijmegen, the Netherlands ; Hogeschool van Arnhem en Nijmegen (HAN) University of Applied Sciences, Faculty of Health and Social Studies, Research Group Occupation and Health, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.

ABSTRACT

Purpose: To develop a self-management program with an additional eHealth module, using the six steps of the intervention mapping (IM) protocol, to help employees with complaints of the arm, neck, and/or shoulder (CANS) cope with their problems.

Methods: In Step 1 of the IM protocol, a needs assessment was performed consisting of a review of the Dutch multidisciplinary guidelines on CANS, and of focus group sessions with employees with CANS (n=15) and with relevant experts (n=17). After the needs assessment, the objectives of the intervention and the determinants of self-management at work were formulated (Step 2). Furthermore, theory-based intervention methods and practical strategies were selected (Step 3), and an intervention program (including the eHealth module) was developed (Step 4). Finally, plans for implementation and evaluation of the program were developed (Steps 5 and 6).

Results: Step 1 of the IM protocol revealed that employees with CANS should be stimulated to search for information about the cause of their complaints, about how to deal with their complaints, and in which manner they can influence their complaints themselves. In Step 2, the overall goal of the intervention was defined as "self-management behavior at work" with the aim to alleviate the perceived disability of the participants. Step 3 described how the intervention methods were translated into practical strategies, and goal setting was introduced as an important method for increasing self-efficacy. The product of Step 4 was the final program plan, consisting of 6-weekly group sessions of 2.5 hours each and an eHealth module. In Step 5, a recruitment plan and course materials were developed, a steering committee was set up, trainers were recruited, and the final program was tested. In Step 6, an evaluation plan was developed, which consists of a randomized controlled trial with a 12-month follow-up period and a qualitative evaluation (interviews) with some of the participants.

Conclusion: This study resulted in a theory- and practice-based self-management program, based on behavioral change theories, guideline-related evidence, and practice-based knowledge that fits the needs of employees with CANS.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus