Table 1
Data collection according to feasibility concepts of Bowen et al. (2009) [23].
| AREA OF FOCUS | DEFINITION | DATA COLLECTION | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| DATA SOURCES | DATA COLLECTION METHODS | OPERATIONALISATION | TIMING OF DATA COLLECTION | ||
| Implementation | To what extent can a new idea, programme, process, or measure be successfully delivered to intended participants in some defined, but not fully controlled, context? |
|
|
|
|
| Adaptation | To what extent does an existing idea, programme, process, or measure perform when changes are made for a new format or with a different population? |
|
|
|
|
| Integration | To what extent can a new idea, programme, process, or measure be integrated within an existing system? |
|
|
|
|
| Acceptability | To what extent is a new idea, programme, process, or measure judged as suitable, satisfying, or attractive to programme deliverers? To programme recipients? |
|
|
|
|
| Practicality | To what extent can an idea, programme, process, or measure be carried out with intended participants using existing means, resources, andcircumstances and without outside intervention? |
|
|
|
|
| Limited efficacy | Does the new idea, programme, process, or measure show promise of being successful with the intended population, even in a highly controlled setting? |
|
|
|
|
Table 2
Background characteristics of participants (n = 18).
| CLIENTS AND INFORMAL CAREGIVERS(n = 9) | CARE PROFESSIONALS AND PROGRAMME DIRECTOR(n = 9) | |
|---|---|---|
| Age (years), mean (SD) | 78.4 (6.0) | 45.2 (11.2) |
| Sex, n (%) | ||
| Male | 3 (33) | |
| Female | 6 (67) | 8 (100) |
| Educational level*, n (%) | ||
| Intermediate | ||
| High | 9 (100) | |
| Years of experience, mean (SD) | ||
| Professional role | 11.9 (7.7) | |
| Reablement | 2.0 (0.0) | |
[i] Notes: * Intermediate: Intermediate vocational or higher secondary education; High: Higher vocational or university education.