Process evaluation of an environmental health risk audit and action plan intervention to reduce alcohol related violence in licensed premises. (December 2016)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Williams, Annie; Moore, Simon; Shovelton, Claire; Moore, Laurence; Murphy, Simon
• Is Part Of: BMC public health. Volume 16:Number 1(2016)
• Page Start: 1
• Page End: 11
• Publication Date: 2016-12
• Subjects: Alcohol -- Violence -- Night-time economy -- Licensed premises -- Environment -- Health and safety -- Process evaluation; Public health -- Periodicals; 362.105
• DOI: 10.1186/s12889-016-3123-9
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1471-2458

Abstract

Abstract Background Alcohol-related violence is associated with licensed premise environments and their management. There is a lack of evidence for effective interventions to address these, and there are significant barriers to implementation. This study aims to understand how development and implementation processes can facilitate intervention reach, fidelity and receipt and therefore provides key process data necessary to interpret the results of the randomised controlled trial conducted in parallel. Methods A process evaluation, embedded within a randomised controlled trial. Intervention development and implementation were assessed via focus groups (n = 2) and semi-structured interviews (n = 22) with Environmental Health Practitioners (EHPs). Reach and fidelity were assessed via routinely collected intervention data, which was was collected from 276 licenced premises across Wales, UK. Case study semi-structured interviews with licensed premises proprietors (n = 30) explored intervention receipt. Results Intervention co-production with senior EHPs facilitated organisational adoption and implementation. Training events for EHPs played an important role in addressing wider organisational concerns regarding partnership working and the contextual integration of the intervention. EHPs delivered the intervention to 98 % of intervention premises; 35 % of premises should have received a follow up enforcement visit, however EHP confidence in dealing with alcohol risk factors meant only 7 % of premises received one. Premises therefore received a similar intervention dose regardless of baseline risk. Intervention receipt appeared to be greatest in premises with an existing commitment to prevention and those in urban environments. Conclusions The study suggests that a collaborative approach to the development and diffusion of interventions is associated with high levels of organisational adoption, implementation and reach. However, the lack of enforcement visits represents implementation failure for a key mechanism of action that is likely to influence intervention effectiveness. To be effective, any future intervention may require a longer implementation period to develop EHP confidence in using enforcement approaches in this area and multiagency enforcement support, which includes the police, to deliver an adequate intervention dose.