How does capacity building of health managers work? A realist evaluation study protocol

Abstract Background There is a need to develop sustainable employability (SE) interventions that are better aligned to the needs of low-educated employees. This group needs to get a voice in intervention development and implementation. In this study, a dialogue-based approach is proposed consisting of an online step-by-step support toolkit for employers, 'Healthy Human Resources' (HHR). When intervening, this toolkit enables and stimulates employers to have a continuous dialogue with their low-educated employees. By improving the employees' job control, HHR is aimed at cost-beneficially improving SE. This paper describes the protocol of the evaluation study to evaluate the effectiveness and implementation process of HHR on the SE of low-educated employees. Methods The protocol of the evaluation study consists of: 1) an effect evaluation with a pretest-posttest design with a one-year follow-up in five work organizations deploying low-educated employees and with SE as the primary outcome and job control as the secondary outcome. The effect evaluation is expanded with a budget impact analysis; 2) a mixed-method process evaluation at six and twelve months after the start of HHR to evaluate the whole implementation process of HHR. This includes the experiences with HHR of various stakeholders, such as employees, human resource managers, and line managers. Results The upcoming effect evaluation, as described in this study protocol, will give insight into the effects of HHR on the SE of low-educated employees. The process evaluation, as described, will provide insight into the barriers and facilitators related to the (in) effectiveness of HHR. Conclusions By improving dialogue, we hypothesize that HHR, through enhancing job control, will strengthen the SE of low-educated employees. If HHR is proven effective, we also recommend the implementation of HHR on a wider scale, in order to tackle the socioeconomic health gap. Key messages This paper describes a protocol for the evaluation of a dialogue-based approach (Healthy HR) to improve the sustainable employability of low-educated employees. Healthy HR is expected to facilitate employers in the development of effective SE interventions in a true dialogue with their low-educated employees.

Download Full-text

Capsulectomy vs capsulotomy in total hip arthroplasty. Clinical outcomes and proprioception evaluation: Study protocol for a randomized, controlled, double blinded trial

Journal of Orthopaedics ◽

10.1016/j.jor.2019.09.020 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 16 (6) ◽

pp. 526-533

Author(s):

Marco Ometti ◽

Leonardo Brambilla ◽

Roberto Gatti ◽

Andrea Tettamanti ◽

Thomas La Cava ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Total Hip Arthroplasty ◽

Clinical Outcomes ◽

Study Protocol ◽

Hip Arthroplasty ◽

Evaluation Study ◽

Total Hip ◽

Randomized Controlled ◽

Double Blinded ◽

Blinded Trial

Download Full-text

Mobilising Q methodology within a realist evaluation: Lessons from an empirical study

Evaluation ◽

10.1177/1356389019841645 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 25 (4) ◽

pp. 430-448

Author(s):

Kevin Harris ◽

Steven Henderson ◽

Brian Wink

Keyword(s):

Social Science ◽

Empirical Study ◽

Capacity Building ◽

Q Methodology ◽

Realist Evaluation ◽

Programme Theory ◽

Evaluation Capacity Building ◽

Evaluation Capacity ◽

Recent Evaluation

Realist evaluation and Q methodology are established approaches in social science. However, integration of Q methodology within a realist evaluation is scarce. This article attempts to illustrate (through a recent evaluation) how Q methodology can support a realist evaluation. The article attempts to capture the philosophical compatibility of the two approaches creating an argument for Q’s integration within realist evaluation. Through the case study selected (a realist evaluation of an evaluation capacity building framework), the iterative methodological process is presented, capturing a snapshot of the findings from the evaluation. This illuminates how Q met the philosophical aims of a realist evaluation to make sense of how, why and under what circumstances a programme or intervention works. It is argued that Q methodology is entirely suitable for capturing the three key stages in a realist evaluation of developing, testing and refining programme theory. It is intended that this article can contribute to inspire other realist evaluators and methodologists to make use of Q as a tool in their evaluation.

Download Full-text