8
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Understanding school staff members’ enforcement of school tobacco policies to achieve tobacco-free school: a realist review

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          School tobacco policies (STPs) that aim to achieve a tobacco-free environment require consistent enforcement by school staff. However, little is known about why staff choose whether or not to enforce STPs. Therefore, we investigated staff members’ responses to STPs that determine enforcement. Furthermore, we examined how these responses depend on contextual factors at the individual, interpersonal, school, implementation, and national levels.

          Methods

          We performed a realist review (RR), which synthesizes existing primary evidence into a programme theory demonstrating key causal pathways through Context-Mechanism-Outcome configurations (CMOs). These CMOs link contextual factors to outcomes (i.e. staff enforcement) by explaining the underlying generative mechanisms (i.e. staff members’ cognitive, psychosocial, and behavioural responses). A systematic literature search for the period 2000–2016 was performed using Academic Search Premier, PsycInfo, and MEDLINE. Forty English-language articles were identified for the synthesis.

          Results

          Our programme theory demonstrated three CMOs: when contextual factors make staff members experience STP enforcement as part of their professional role and duties, it may lead to staff members showing responsibility for STP enforcement (CMO1); when contextual factors make staff members feel their contribution is leading to positive outcomes, it may lead to staff members showing motivation to enforce STPs (CMO2), and when contextual factors make staff members feel that they are able to deal with students’ responses, it may lead to staff members showing confidence in STP enforcement (CMO3). Moreover, the programme theory provided more precise insights into what contextual factors contribute to triggering the individual mechanisms and the consequent outcomes.

          Conclusions

          By applying a realist approach, we have been able to detect three CMOs explaining staff members’ STP enforcement. The findings provide useful insights explaining how stakeholders can support staff members’ STP enforcement and consequently improve the impact of STPs on adolescent smoking.

          Electronic supplementary material

          The online version of this article (10.1186/s13643-019-1086-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

          Related collections

          Most cited references35

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          Using Normalization Process Theory in feasibility studies and process evaluations of complex healthcare interventions: a systematic review

          Background Normalization Process Theory (NPT) identifies, characterises and explains key mechanisms that promote and inhibit the implementation, embedding and integration of new health techniques, technologies and other complex interventions. A large body of literature that employs NPT to inform feasibility studies and process evaluations of complex healthcare interventions has now emerged. The aims of this review were to review this literature; to identify and characterise the uses and limits of NPT in research on the implementation and integration of healthcare interventions; and to explore NPT’s contribution to understanding the dynamics of these processes. Methods A qualitative systematic review was conducted. We searched Web of Science, Scopus and Google Scholar for articles with empirical data in peer-reviewed journals that cited either key papers presenting and developing NPT, or the NPT Online Toolkit (www.normalizationprocess.org). We included in the review only articles that used NPT as the primary approach to collection, analysis or reporting of data in studies of the implementation of healthcare techniques, technologies or other interventions. A structured data extraction instrument was used, and data were analysed qualitatively. Results Searches revealed 3322 citations. We show that after eliminating 2337 duplicates and broken or junk URLs, 985 were screened as titles and abstracts. Of these, 101 were excluded because they did not fit the inclusion criteria for the review. This left 884 articles for full-text screening. Of these, 754 did not fit the inclusion criteria for the review. This left 130 papers presenting results from 108 identifiable studies to be included in the review. NPT appears to provide researchers and practitioners with a conceptual vocabulary for rigorous studies of implementation processes. It identifies, characterises and explains empirically identifiable mechanisms that motivate and shape implementation processes. Taken together, these mean that analyses using NPT can effectively assist in the explanation of the success or failure of specific implementation projects. Ten percent of papers included critiques of some aspect of NPT, with those that did mainly focusing on its terminology. However, two studies critiqued NPT emphasis on agency, and one study critiqued NPT for its normative focus. Conclusions This review demonstrates that researchers found NPT useful and applied it across a wide range of interventions. It has been effectively used to aid intervention development and implementation planning as well as evaluating and understanding implementation processes themselves. In particular, NPT appears to have offered a valuable set of conceptual tools to aid understanding of implementation as a dynamic process. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s13012-018-0758-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Implementing health promotion programmes in schools: a realist systematic review of research and experience in the United Kingdom

            Background Schools have long been viewed as a good setting in which to encourage healthy lifestyles amongst children, and schools in many countries aspire to more comprehensive, integrated approaches to health promotion. Recent reviews have identified evidence of the effects of school health promotion on children’s and young people’s health. However, understanding of how such programmes can be implemented in schools is more limited. Methods We conducted a realist review to identify the conditions and actions which lead to the successful implementation of health promotion programmes in schools. We used the international literature to develop programme theories which were then tested using evaluations of school health promotion programmes conducted in the United Kingdom (UK). Iterative searching and screening was conducted to identify sources and clear criteria applied for appraisal of included sources. A review advisory group comprising educational and public health practitioners, commissioners, and academics was established at the outset. Results In consultation with the review advisory group, we developed four programme theories (preparing for implementation, initial implementation, embedding into routine practice, adaptation and evolution); these were then refined using the UK evaluations in the review. This enabled us to identify transferable mechanisms and enabling and constraining contexts and investigate how the operation of mechanisms differed in different contexts. We also identified steps that should be taken at a senior level in relation to preparing for implementation (which revolved around negotiation about programme delivery) and initial implementation (which centred on facilitation, support, and reciprocity—the latter for both programme deliverers and pupils). However, the depth and rigour of evidence concerning embedding into routine practice and adaptation and evolution was limited. Conclusions Our findings provide guidance for the design, implementation, and evaluation of health promotion in schools and identify the areas where further research is needed. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13012-015-0338-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Becoming a health promoting school: evaluating the process of effective implementation in Scotland.

              Increasingly, researchers are exploring alternative ways of assessing the impact of 'Health Promoting School' (HPS) initiatives, in recognition of the model's emphasis on achieving change that is both enduring and far-reaching. However, it is still assumed that initiatives will lead to immediate change at the individual level. This paper challenges that view and argues that potential markers of success associated with process need to be identified earlier as a means of supporting schools and teachers. Notwithstanding differences in the way the HPS is conceptualized and implemented, four themes are highlighted that have relevance beyond any one school or country. These were drawn from a process evaluation of a European Network of HPSs Project in Scotland. They highlight the ways in which schools were able to successfully adopt HPS principles and the conditions that need to be in place for the HPS concept to flourish. Such indicators need to be given greater recognition as HPS outcomes if schools are to progress beyond the early stages of project implementation.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                anu.linnansaari@tuni.fi
                m.schreuders@amc.uva.nl
                a.kunst@amc.uva.nl
                arja.rimpela@tuni.fi
                pirjo.lindfors@tuni.fi
                Journal
                Syst Rev
                Syst Rev
                Systematic Reviews
                BioMed Central (London )
                2046-4053
                19 July 2019
                19 July 2019
                2019
                : 8
                : 177
                Affiliations
                [1 ]ISNI 0000 0001 2314 6254, GRID grid.502801.e, Faculty of Social Sciences, Health Sciences, , Tampere University, ; P.O. Box 100, 33014 Tampere, Finland
                [2 ]ISNI 0000000084992262, GRID grid.7177.6, Department of Public Health, Amsterdam UMC, , University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam Public Health Institute, ; Amsterdam, The Netherlands
                [3 ]ISNI 0000 0001 2314 6254, GRID grid.502801.e, PERLA—Tampere Centre for Childhood, Youth and Family Research, , Tampere University, ; 33014 Tampere, Finland
                [4 ]ISNI 0000 0004 0628 2985, GRID grid.412330.7, Department of Adolescent Psychiatry, Pitkäniemi Hospital, , Tampere University Hospital, ; 33380 Nokia, Finland
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9316-7955
                Article
                1086
                10.1186/s13643-019-1086-5
                6642528
                31324212
                0cf483d1-b02a-4ac0-9a8f-18fad91d1a0c
                © The Author(s). 2019

                Open AccessThis 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.

                History
                : 24 August 2018
                : 2 July 2019
                Funding
                Funded by: Horizon 2020 (SILNE-R Enhancing the effectiveness of programs and strategies to prevent smoking by adolescents: a realist evaluation comparing seven European countries))
                Award ID: 635056
                Categories
                Research
                Custom metadata
                © The Author(s) 2019

                Public health
                school tobacco policies,implementation,enforcement,school staff members,realist review

                Comments

                Comment on this article