The influence of a blended, theoretically-informed pre-implementation strategy on school-based clinician implementation of an evidence-based trauma intervention

Lyon, Aaron R.; Cook, Clayton R.; Duong, Mylien T.; Nicodimos, Semret; Pullmann, Michael D.; Brewer, Stephanie K.; Gaias, Larissa M.; Cox, Shanon

doi:10.1186/s13012-019-0905-3

Implementation Science

Table 3 Mean scores, standard deviations, and BASIS impact for outcomes at each timepoint

From: The influence of a blended, theoretically-informed pre-implementation strategy on school-based clinician implementation of an evidence-based trauma intervention

Measures	Condition	n	Baseline		Post		Follow-up	Baseline to post regression			Post to FU Regression
Measures	Condition	n	Mean	SD	Mean	SD	Mean	SD	Beta	95% CI	Beta	95% CI
Attitudes toward EBPs (EBPAS)
Requirement	BASIS	11	8.85	2.40	9.45	2.81	9.89	1.17	.106	− .211, .423	.396	− .010, .802
Requirement	Attention	13	9.69	1.65	9.54	2.26	7.31	4.39	.106	− .211, .423	.396	− .010, .802
Appeal	BASIS	11	12.74	3.35	14.18	1.78	13.33	2.18	.489	.158, .820	− .026	− .379, .327
Appeal	Attention	13	13.54	1.94	12.08	2.72	12.00	3.06	.489	.158, .820	− .026	− .379, .327
Openness	BASIS	11	11.76	2.20	13.73	1.74	12.22	1.72	.488	.174, .802	− .121	− .405, .163
Openness	Attention	13	13.00	2.48	12.00	2.83	11.62	3.15	.488	.174, .802	− .121	− .405, .163
Divergence	BASIS	11	12.53	1.85	12.27	2.37	13.00	2.18	− .105	− .517, .307	.481	.261, .701
Divergence	Attention	13	13.31	1.44	13.00	1.83	12.08	1.38	− .105	− .517, .307	.481	.261, .701
Fit	BASIS	11	23.03	3.76	24.18	2.93	22.56	3.88	.473	.180, .766	.191	− .271, .653
Fit	Attention	13	22.31	3.84	19.77	4.51	19.31	3.99	.473	.180, .766	.191	− .271, .653
Burden	BASIS	11	10.70	2.45	10.18	3.46	9.11	3.95	.277	− .143, .697	.074	− .361, .509
Burden	Attention	13	11.08	2.25	8.62	3.97	7.92	3.48	.277	− .143, .697	.074	− .361, .509
Social norms
Injunctive norms	BASIS	11	0.90	1.14	1.36	1.04	0.81	1.48	.309	.721, − .103	.357	.102, − .817
Injunctive norms	Attention	13	1.00	0.82	0.81	0.75	1.42	0.62	.309	.721, − .103	.357	.102, − .817
Descriptive norms	BASIS	11	1.11	1.26	1.45	0.76	0.64	0.90	.474	.859, .089	.348	.102, − .798
Descriptive norms	Attention	13	1.21	0.89	0.60	1.04	0.69	0.90	.474	.859, .089	.348	.102, − .798
Self-efficacy	BASIS	9	35.11	6.07	35.44	4.28	31.78	5.45	.360	− .020, .740	− .297	− .667, .073
Self-efficacy	Attention	13	34.85	4.76	31.08	5.81	32.08	5.62	.360	− .020, .740	− .297	− .667, .073
Implementation citizenship behaviors (ICBS)
Helping others	BASIS	11	2.73	0.65	2.55	1.11	2.15	1.26	.166	− .185, .517	− .082	− .424, .260
Helping others	Attention	13	1.95	0.97	1.85	0.95	1.82	1.21	.166	− .185, .517	− .082	− .424, .260
Keeping informed	BASIS	11	2.85	0.70	2.91	0.67	2.41	0.98	.102	− .163, .366	− .275	− .569, .020
Keeping informed	Attention	13	2.51	1.18	2.49	1.22	2.64	1.13	.102	− .163, .366	− .275	− .569, .020
Taking initiative	BASIS	11	3.11	0.65	2.86	0.81	2.44	1.16	.087	− .254, .428	− .271	− .493, −.050
Taking initiative	Attention	13	2.60	0.90	2.48	0.89	2.58	0.98	.087	− .254, .428	− .271	− .493, −.050
Advocacy	BASIS	11	3.36	0.54	3.15	0.84	2.69	1.24	− .053	− .434, .327	− .218	− .439, .003
Advocacy	Attention	13	2.75	0.82	2.77	0.79	2.78	0.97	− .053	− .434, .327	− .218	− .439, .003
Mean total	BASIS	11	3.01	0.51	2.87	0.79	2.42	1.09	.066	− .244, .376	− .252	− .489, − .016
Mean total	Attention	13	2.45	0.87	2.40	0.85	2.46	0.98	.066	− .244, .376	− .252	− .489, − .016
Intentions to implement CBITS	BASIS	9	31.00	5.68	30.89	4.91	24.78	7.17	.339	.007, .671	− .154	− .597, .289
Intentions to implement CBITS	Attention	13	29.54	4.82	24.08	8.37	24.08	7.92	.339	.007, .671	− .154	− .597, .289

Bolded betas represent significant effects. Regression models examine impact of condition, controlling for baseline score

Back to article page

ISSN: 1748-5908

Contact us

Submission enquiries: Access here and click Contact Us
General enquiries: info@biomedcentral.com