Search

Aim: With a number of qualified community practitioner nurse prescribers (CPNPs) not prescribing, this research aimed to understand what influences this behaviour. Design: A qualitative research design. Methods: Semi‐structured interviews, based on the theoretical domains framework (TDF) were conducted with 20 CPNPs. Data collection took place between March‐July 2018 and continued until data saturation was reached. Results: Nine themes inductively explained prescribing behaviour: 1) 'Knowledge and experience'; 2) 'Consultation and communication skills'; 3) 'Professional confidence and identity'; 4) 'Wanting the best outcome'; 5) 'NHS versus patient cost'; 6) 'Emotion‐led decisions'; 7) 'Time allocation'; 8) 'Formulary access' and 9) 'Supporting environment for patient‐centred care'. Themes were then deductively mapped to the TDF and COM‐B. Conclusion: There is an ongoing need to support community practitioner nurse prescribers' 'Capability' to prescribe in terms of knowledge and aquired skills; 'Opportunity' to make prescribing easier, such as access to a wider and up to date nurse formulary alongside effective clinical support; and 'Motivation' to feel confident in prescribing behaviour, highlighting positive patient outcomes while reducing perceived issues such as cost and non‐adherence. Impact: Findings show that Capability, Opportunity and Motivation all influence the decision to prescribe. Those responsible for professional regulation and training should ensure community practitioner nurse prescribers have access to the relevant knowledge, skills and formulary to facilitate their prescribing behaviour. Professional confidence and identity as a prescriber should be encouraged, with acknowledgment of influences such as cost and emotion. An environment that allows for patient‐centred care and the best outcome should be supported, this may mean increasing time allocated to consultations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Children's vegetable intake is low, despite benefits for immediate and long-term health. Repeatedly reoffering vegetables, role-modelling consumption, and offering non-food rewards effectively increase children's vegetable acceptance and intake. However, a number of barriers prevent families from reoffering previously-rejected vegetables. This study used the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) and the COM-B model of behaviour to explore barriers and enablers to reoffering, role-modelling and offering non-food rewards among parents of 2-4-year-old children. Twenty-five semi-structured interviews were conducted, from which eleven core inductive themes were generated: 'Child factors', 'Eating beliefs', 'Effectiveness beliefs', 'Past experience', 'Current family behaviours', 'Harms', 'Knowledge', 'Need for change', 'Parent effort', 'Parent values' and 'Practical issues'. The codes underpinning these themes were inductively mapped to 11 of the 14 TDF domains, and five of the six COM-B components. Previously-reported influences on families' vegetable feeding practices were confirmed, including concerns about child rejection of foods/meals, cost of vegetables, and food waste. Novel findings included some parents' perceptions that these practices are pressurising, and that certain beliefs/knowledge about children's eating behaviour can provide a "protective mindset" that supports families' perseverance with reoffering over time. Future interventions should be tailored to better reflect the diversity of needs and previous experiences of feeding that families have, with some families likely to find that troubleshooting and further signposting is appropriate for their needs while others might benefit from more persuasive and educational approaches. The mapping of codes to the TDF and COM-B will facilitate the identification of appropriate intervention functions and behaviour change techniques when designing new interventions to support families with increasing their children's vegetable intake. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The workplace is a prominent domain for excessive sitting. The consequences of increased sitting time include adverse health outcomes such as cardiovascular disease and poor mental wellbeing. There is evidence that breaking up sitting could improve health, however, any such intervention in the workplace would need to be informed by a theoretical evidence-based framework. The aim of this study was to use the Behaviour Change Wheel (BCW) to develop a tailored intervention to break up and reduce workplace sitting in desk-based workers.Methods: The BCW guide was followed for this qualitative, pre-intervention development study. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 25 office workers (26-59 years, mean age 40.9 [SD = 10.8] years; 68% female) who were purposively recruited from local council offices and a university in the East of England region. The interview questions were developed using the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF). Transcripts were deductively analysed using the COM-B (Capability, Opportunity, Motivation - Behaviour) model of behaviour. The Behaviour Change Technique Taxonomy Version 1 (BCTv1) was thereafter used to identify possible strategies that could be used to facilitate change in sitting behaviour of office workers in a future intervention.Results: Qualitative analysis using COM-B identified that participants felt that they had the physical Capability to break up their sitting time, however, some lacked the psychological Capability in relation to the knowledge of both guidelines for sitting time and the consequences of excess sitting. Social and physical Opportunity was identified as important, such as a supportive organisational culture (social) and the need for environmental resources (physical). Motivation was highlighted as a core target for intervention, both reflective Motivation, such as beliefs about capability and intention and automatic in terms of overcoming habit through reinforcement. Seven intervention functions and three policy categories from the BCW were identified as relevant. Finally, 39 behaviour change techniques (BCTs) were identified as potential active components for an intervention to break up sitting time in the workplace.Conclusions: The TDF, COM-B model and BCW can be successfully applied through a systematic process to understand the drivers of behaviour of office workers to develop a co-created intervention that can be used to break up and decrease sitting in the workplace. Intervention designers should consider the identified BCW factors and BCTs when developing interventions to reduce and break up workplace sitting. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]