Sekhon, M; Cartwright, M; Francis, JJ
(2017)
Acceptability of healthcare interventions: an overview of reviews and development of a theoretical framework.
BMC Health Serv Res, 17 (1).
p. 88.
ISSN 1472-6963
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-017-2031-8
SGUL Authors: Sekhon, Mandeep
|
PDF
Published Version
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution. Download (1MB) | Preview |
|
![]() |
Microsoft Word (.docx) (Additional file 1)
Published Version
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution. Download (19kB) |
|
![]() |
Microsoft Word (.docx) (Additional file 2)
Published Version
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution. Download (41kB) |
|
![]() |
Microsoft Word (.docx) (Additional file 3)
Published Version
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution. Download (12kB) |
|
![]() |
Microsoft Word (.docx) (Additional file 4)
Published Version
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution. Download (12kB) |
|
![]() |
Microsoft Word (.docx) (Additional file 5)
Published Version
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution. Download (12kB) |
|
![]() |
Microsoft Word (.docx) (Additional file 6)
Published Version
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution. Download (13kB) |
Abstract
BACKGROUND: It is increasingly acknowledged that 'acceptability' should be considered when designing, evaluating and implementing healthcare interventions. However, the published literature offers little guidance on how to define or assess acceptability. The purpose of this study was to develop a multi-construct theoretical framework of acceptability of healthcare interventions that can be applied to assess prospective (i.e. anticipated) and retrospective (i.e. experienced) acceptability from the perspective of intervention delivers and recipients. METHODS: Two methods were used to select the component constructs of acceptability. 1) An overview of reviews was conducted to identify systematic reviews that claim to define, theorise or measure acceptability of healthcare interventions. 2) Principles of inductive and deductive reasoning were applied to theorise the concept of acceptability and develop a theoretical framework. Steps included (1) defining acceptability; (2) describing its properties and scope and (3) identifying component constructs and empirical indicators. RESULTS: From the 43 reviews included in the overview, none explicitly theorised or defined acceptability. Measures used to assess acceptability focused on behaviour (e.g. dropout rates) (23 reviews), affect (i.e. feelings) (5 reviews), cognition (i.e. perceptions) (7 reviews) or a combination of these (8 reviews). From the methods described above we propose a definition: Acceptability is a multi-faceted construct that reflects the extent to which people delivering or receiving a healthcare intervention consider it to be appropriate, based on anticipated or experienced cognitive and emotional responses to the intervention. The theoretical framework of acceptability (TFA) consists of seven component constructs: affective attitude, burden, perceived effectiveness, ethicality, intervention coherence, opportunity costs, and self-efficacy. CONCLUSION: Despite frequent claims that healthcare interventions have assessed acceptability, it is evident that acceptability research could be more robust. The proposed definition of acceptability and the TFA can inform assessment tools and evaluations of the acceptability of new or existing interventions.
Item Type: | Article | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Additional Information: | © The Author(s). 2017 Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated. | ||||||
Keywords: | Acceptability, Complex intervention, Defining constructs, Healthcare intervention, Theory development, Consensus, Humans, Models, Theoretical, Patient Acceptance of Health Care, Prospective Studies, Retrospective Studies, Review Literature as Topic, Humans, Retrospective Studies, Prospective Studies, Consensus, Models, Theoretical, Patient Acceptance of Health Care, Review Literature as Topic, 0807 Library and Information Studies, 1110 Nursing, 1117 Public Health and Health Services, Health Policy & Services | ||||||
SGUL Research Institute / Research Centre: | Academic Structure > Population Health Research Institute (INPH) | ||||||
Journal or Publication Title: | BMC Health Serv Res | ||||||
ISSN: | 1472-6963 | ||||||
Language: | eng | ||||||
Dates: |
|
||||||
Publisher License: | Creative Commons: Attribution 4.0 | ||||||
PubMed ID: | 28126032 | ||||||
Go to PubMed abstract | |||||||
URI: | https://openaccess.sgul.ac.uk/id/eprint/114618 | ||||||
Publisher's version: | https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-017-2031-8 |
Statistics
Actions (login required)
![]() |
Edit Item |