Why do interventions work in some places and not others: a breastfeeding support group trial

Pat Hoddinott, Rosemary J. Britten, Roisin Pill

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

58 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

In a cluster randomised controlled trial of a policy to provide community breastfeeding support groups in Scotland, breastfeeding rates declined in 3 of 7 intervention localities. From a preliminary study, we expected breastfeeding outcomes to vary and we prospectively used qualitative and quantitative methods to ask why. Ethnographic in-depth interviews, focus groups, observations and survey data were analysed to build seven embedded case studies. A pyramidal model of how primary health service organisations implemented the policy was constructed prior to knowing trial outcomes to minimise bias. Informed by a realist approach, the model explained variation in (a) policy implementation (b) the breastfeeding outcomes, whereas the quantity of intervention delivered did not. In the three localities where breastfeeding rates declined, negative aspects of place including deprivation, unsuitable premises and geographical barriers to inter-professional communication; personnel resources including staff shortages, high workload and low morale; and organisational change predominated (the base model tiers). Managers focused on solving these problems rather than delivering the policy and evidence of progress to the higher model tiers was weak. In contrast, where breastfeeding rates increased the base tiers of the model were less problematic, there was more evidence of leadership, focus on the policy, multi-disciplinary partnership working and reflective action cycles (the higher model tiers). We advocate an ethnographic approach to the design and evaluation of complex intervention trials and illustrate how this can assist in developing an explanatory model. More attention should be given to the complex systems within which policies and interventions occur, to identify and understand the favourable conditions necessary for a successful intervention.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)769-778
Number of pages10
JournalSocial Science & Medicine
Volume70
Issue number5
Early online date11 Dec 2009
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Mar 2010

Fingerprint

Self-Help Groups
Breast Feeding
Group
Morale
Organizational Innovation
Scotland
Workload
Focus Groups
policy implementation
Health Services
organizational change
quantitative method
deprivation
qualitative method
workload
Randomized Controlled Trials
shortage
evidence
Communication
Organizations

Keywords

  • complex Interventions
  • breastfeeding
  • realist evaluation
  • public health policy
  • implementation research
  • randomised controlled trial
  • UK
  • Scotland
  • primary care

Cite this

Why do interventions work in some places and not others : a breastfeeding support group trial. / Hoddinott, Pat; Britten, Rosemary J.; Pill, Roisin.

In: Social Science & Medicine, Vol. 70, No. 5, 03.2010, p. 769-778.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Hoddinott, Pat ; Britten, Rosemary J. ; Pill, Roisin. / Why do interventions work in some places and not others : a breastfeeding support group trial. In: Social Science & Medicine. 2010 ; Vol. 70, No. 5. pp. 769-778.
@article{168edca81800462cb7c32074a940659c,
title = "Why do interventions work in some places and not others: a breastfeeding support group trial",
abstract = "In a cluster randomised controlled trial of a policy to provide community breastfeeding support groups in Scotland, breastfeeding rates declined in 3 of 7 intervention localities. From a preliminary study, we expected breastfeeding outcomes to vary and we prospectively used qualitative and quantitative methods to ask why. Ethnographic in-depth interviews, focus groups, observations and survey data were analysed to build seven embedded case studies. A pyramidal model of how primary health service organisations implemented the policy was constructed prior to knowing trial outcomes to minimise bias. Informed by a realist approach, the model explained variation in (a) policy implementation (b) the breastfeeding outcomes, whereas the quantity of intervention delivered did not. In the three localities where breastfeeding rates declined, negative aspects of place including deprivation, unsuitable premises and geographical barriers to inter-professional communication; personnel resources including staff shortages, high workload and low morale; and organisational change predominated (the base model tiers). Managers focused on solving these problems rather than delivering the policy and evidence of progress to the higher model tiers was weak. In contrast, where breastfeeding rates increased the base tiers of the model were less problematic, there was more evidence of leadership, focus on the policy, multi-disciplinary partnership working and reflective action cycles (the higher model tiers). We advocate an ethnographic approach to the design and evaluation of complex intervention trials and illustrate how this can assist in developing an explanatory model. More attention should be given to the complex systems within which policies and interventions occur, to identify and understand the favourable conditions necessary for a successful intervention.",
keywords = "complex Interventions, breastfeeding, realist evaluation, public health policy, implementation research, randomised controlled trial, UK, Scotland, primary care",
author = "Pat Hoddinott and Britten, {Rosemary J.} and Roisin Pill",
year = "2010",
month = "3",
doi = "10.1016/j.socscimed.2009.10.067",
language = "English",
volume = "70",
pages = "769--778",
journal = "Social Science & Medicine",
issn = "0277-9536",
publisher = "Elsevier Limited",
number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Why do interventions work in some places and not others

T2 - a breastfeeding support group trial

AU - Hoddinott, Pat

AU - Britten, Rosemary J.

AU - Pill, Roisin

PY - 2010/3

Y1 - 2010/3

N2 - In a cluster randomised controlled trial of a policy to provide community breastfeeding support groups in Scotland, breastfeeding rates declined in 3 of 7 intervention localities. From a preliminary study, we expected breastfeeding outcomes to vary and we prospectively used qualitative and quantitative methods to ask why. Ethnographic in-depth interviews, focus groups, observations and survey data were analysed to build seven embedded case studies. A pyramidal model of how primary health service organisations implemented the policy was constructed prior to knowing trial outcomes to minimise bias. Informed by a realist approach, the model explained variation in (a) policy implementation (b) the breastfeeding outcomes, whereas the quantity of intervention delivered did not. In the three localities where breastfeeding rates declined, negative aspects of place including deprivation, unsuitable premises and geographical barriers to inter-professional communication; personnel resources including staff shortages, high workload and low morale; and organisational change predominated (the base model tiers). Managers focused on solving these problems rather than delivering the policy and evidence of progress to the higher model tiers was weak. In contrast, where breastfeeding rates increased the base tiers of the model were less problematic, there was more evidence of leadership, focus on the policy, multi-disciplinary partnership working and reflective action cycles (the higher model tiers). We advocate an ethnographic approach to the design and evaluation of complex intervention trials and illustrate how this can assist in developing an explanatory model. More attention should be given to the complex systems within which policies and interventions occur, to identify and understand the favourable conditions necessary for a successful intervention.

AB - In a cluster randomised controlled trial of a policy to provide community breastfeeding support groups in Scotland, breastfeeding rates declined in 3 of 7 intervention localities. From a preliminary study, we expected breastfeeding outcomes to vary and we prospectively used qualitative and quantitative methods to ask why. Ethnographic in-depth interviews, focus groups, observations and survey data were analysed to build seven embedded case studies. A pyramidal model of how primary health service organisations implemented the policy was constructed prior to knowing trial outcomes to minimise bias. Informed by a realist approach, the model explained variation in (a) policy implementation (b) the breastfeeding outcomes, whereas the quantity of intervention delivered did not. In the three localities where breastfeeding rates declined, negative aspects of place including deprivation, unsuitable premises and geographical barriers to inter-professional communication; personnel resources including staff shortages, high workload and low morale; and organisational change predominated (the base model tiers). Managers focused on solving these problems rather than delivering the policy and evidence of progress to the higher model tiers was weak. In contrast, where breastfeeding rates increased the base tiers of the model were less problematic, there was more evidence of leadership, focus on the policy, multi-disciplinary partnership working and reflective action cycles (the higher model tiers). We advocate an ethnographic approach to the design and evaluation of complex intervention trials and illustrate how this can assist in developing an explanatory model. More attention should be given to the complex systems within which policies and interventions occur, to identify and understand the favourable conditions necessary for a successful intervention.

KW - complex Interventions

KW - breastfeeding

KW - realist evaluation

KW - public health policy

KW - implementation research

KW - randomised controlled trial

KW - UK

KW - Scotland

KW - primary care

U2 - 10.1016/j.socscimed.2009.10.067

DO - 10.1016/j.socscimed.2009.10.067

M3 - Article

VL - 70

SP - 769

EP - 778

JO - Social Science & Medicine

JF - Social Science & Medicine

SN - 0277-9536

IS - 5

ER -