Thompson, C.A. orcid.org/0000-0002-9369-1204, Daffu-O’Reilly, A., Willis, T. orcid.org/0000-0002-0252-9923
et al. (8 more authors)
(2023)
‘Smart’ BLE wearables for digital contact tracing in care homes during the COVID-19 pandemic—a process evaluation of the CONTACT feasibility study.
Implementation Science Communications, 4 (1).
155.
ISSN 2662-2211
Abstract
Background Rapid and mass transmission of the SARS-CoV-2 virus amongst vulnerable people led to devastating effects from COVID-19 in care homes. The CONTACT intervention introduced Bluetooth Low Energy ‘smart’ wearable devices (BLE wearables) as a basis for automated contact tracing in, and feedback on infection risks and patterns to, care homes to try and improve infection prevention and control (IPC). We planned a cluster randomised controlled trial (RCT) of CONTACT. To be feasible, homes had to adopt CONTACT’s technology and new ways of working. This paper reports on the process evaluation conducted alongside CONTACT’s feasibility study and explains why it lacked the feasibility and acceptability for a definitive RCT.
Methods This mixed method process evaluation used Normalisation Process Theory (NPT) qualitative (interviews, field notes, study case report forms and documents, and observation) and quantitative (survey instruments, counts of activity) data to plan, implement, and analyse the mechanisms, effects, and contextual factors that shaped the feasibility and acceptability of the CONTACT intervention.
Results Thirteen themes within four core NPT constructs explained CONTACT’s lack of feasibility. Coherence: the home’s varied in the scale and extent of commitment and understanding of the technology and study procedures. Leadership credibility was important but compromised by competing priorities. Management and direct care staff saw CONTACT differently. Work to promote (cognitive participation) and enact (collective action) CONTACT was burdensome and failed to be prioritised over competing COVID-19-related demands on time and scarce human and cognitive resources. Ultimately, staff appraisal of the value of CONTACT-generated information and study procedures (reflexivity) was that any utility for IPC was insufficient to outweigh the perceived burden and complexity involved.
Conclusions Despite implementation failure, dismissing BLE wearables’ potential for contact tracing is premature. In non-pandemic conditions, with more time, better co-design and integration of theory-driven implementation strategies tailored to care homes’ unique contexts, researchers could enhance normalisation in readiness for future pandemic challenges.
Metadata
Item Type: | Article |
---|---|
Authors/Creators: | This paper has 11 authors. You can scroll the list below to see them all or them all.
|
Copyright, Publisher and Additional Information: | This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. 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 in a credit line to the data. |
Keywords: | BLE Wearables; COVID-19; Care homes; Contact tracing; Digital; Long-term care; Normalisation Process Theory; Process evaluation |
Dates: |
|
Institution: | The University of Leeds |
Academic Units: | The University of Leeds > Faculty of Medicine and Health (Leeds) > School of Healthcare (Leeds) > Nursing Adult (Leeds) The University of Leeds > Faculty of Medicine and Health (Leeds) > School of Medicine (Leeds) > Inst of Clinical Trials Research (LICTR) (Leeds) The University of Leeds > Faculty of Engineering & Physical Sciences (Leeds) > School of Civil Engineering (Leeds) The University of Leeds > Faculty of Engineering & Physical Sciences (Leeds) > School of Electronic & Electrical Engineering (Leeds) > Robotics, Autonomous Systems & Sensing (Leeds) The University of Leeds > Faculty of Medicine and Health (Leeds) > School of Medicine (Leeds) > Leeds Institute of Health Sciences (Leeds) > Academic Unit of Health Economics (Leeds) The University of Leeds > Faculty of Medicine and Health (Leeds) > School of Medicine (Leeds) > Leeds Institute of Health Sciences (Leeds) > Academic Unit of Primary Care (Leeds) |
Funding Information: | Funder Grant number NIHR National Inst Health Research NIHR132197 |
Depositing User: | Symplectic Publications |
Date Deposited: | 05 Jan 2024 11:24 |
Last Modified: | 05 Jan 2024 11:24 |
Published Version: | http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s43058-023-00533-0 |
Status: | Published |
Publisher: | Springer Science and Business Media LLC |
Identification Number: | 10.1186/s43058-023-00533-0 |
Related URLs: | |
Open Archives Initiative ID (OAI ID): | oai:eprints.whiterose.ac.uk:207202 |