This study aimed to evaluate the feasibility of delivering a vocational rehabilitation intervention (Return to Work After Trauma—ROWTATE), remotely to individuals recovering from traumatic injuries. The primary objectives were to assess therapists’ training and competence, adapt the intervention and training for remote delivery and assess the feasibility and fidelity of remote delivery to inform a definitive randomised controlled trial.

A mixed-methods feasibility study incorporating (1) telerehabilitation qualitative literature review, (2) qualitative interviews preintervention and postintervention with therapists and patients, (3) a team objective structured clinical examination to assess competency, (4) usefulness of training, attitudes towards (15-item Evidence-Based Practice Attitude Scale) and confidence in (4-item Evidence Based Practice Confidence Scale) evidence-based practice, intervention delivery confidence (8-bespoke questions) and intervention behaviour determinants (51-items Theoretical Domains Framework) and (5) single-arm intervention delivery feasibility study.

The study was conducted in two UK Major Trauma Centres. The intervention and training were adapted for remote delivery due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Therapists: Seven occupational therapists (OTs) and clinical psychologists (CPs) were trained, and six participated in competency assessment. Seven OTs and CPs participated in preintervention interviews and surveys; six completed post-intervention interviews and four completed post-training surveys. Patients: 10 patients were enrolled in the single-arm feasibility study and 4 of these participated in postintervention qualitative interviews. Inclusion criteria included therapists involved in vocational rehabilitation delivery and patients admitted to major trauma centres. Exclusion criteria included participation in other vocational rehabilitation trials or those who had returned to work or education for at least 80% of preinjury hours. Intervention: The ROWTATE vocational rehabilitation intervention was delivered remotely by trained OTs and CPs. Training included competency assessments, mentoring and adaptation for telerehabilitation. The intervention was delivered over multiple sessions, with content tailored to individual patient needs.

Therapists found the training useful, reported positive attitudes (Evidence-Based Practice Attitude Scale mean=2.9 (SD 0.9)) and high levels of confidence in delivering evidence-based practice (range 75%–100%) and the ROWTATE intervention (range 80%–100%). Intervention barriers identified pretraining became facilitators post-training. Half the therapists needed additional support post-training through mentoring or additional training. The intervention and training were successfully adapted for remote delivery. High levels of fidelity (intervention components delivered: OTs=84.5%, CPs=92.9%) and session attendance rates were found (median: OT=97%, CP=100%). Virtually all sessions were delivered remotely (OT=98%, CP=100%). The intervention was acceptable to patients and therapists; both considered face-to-face delivery where necessary was important.

The ROWTATE intervention was delivered remotely with high fidelity and attendance and was acceptable to patients and therapists. Definitive trial key changes include modifying therapist training, competency assessment, face-to-face intervention delivery where necessary and addressing lower fidelity intervention components.

ISRCTN74668529.

This scoping review aimed to map studies on behaviour change interventions that address antibiotic treatment-seeking behaviour for respiratory tract infections in primary and community care settings.

This review is based on the Joanna Briggs Institute guidelines for scoping reviews, guided by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews.

A literature search in January 2024 and May 2024 was performed across Medline, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Web of Science Core Collection, Scopus, EThOS and Google Scholar was performed.

Eligible studies described behaviour change interventions in primary and community care settings, published from 2000 onward across all countries.

Descriptive data relating to study details and intervention functions were gathered and organised according to the Capability, Opportunity, Motivation and Behaviour change framework in a predeveloped data extraction sheet. Dual data extraction occurred, and inter-rater reliability results are reported (K=0.83).

The scoping review identified 38 eligible studies, which consisted of randomised controlled trials (7/38), cluster randomised controlled trials (6/38), randomised experiments (5/38), cross-sectional studies (5/38), qualitative investigations (5/38) and quasi-experimental designs (4/38). Most interventions focused on educational resources (15/38), digital tools (7/38) and community campaigns (6/38), with fewer targeting decision-making processes (4/38) or psychological drivers of antibiotic-seeking behaviour (3/38). Only one study was conducted in low-income and middle-income countries, and only one separately assessed behaviour change as a measured outcome.

This scoping review highlights a wide range of research methodologies within the topic area. There was some limited evidence of intervention efficacy for antibiotic prescription rates, particularly interventions focused on enhancing knowledge and access to resources. However, more emphasis is needed on standardising outcome measures and evaluating long-term outcomes.