Skip to main content

Table 3 Relevance and Feasibility of the RID intervention

From: Process evaluation of a tailored intervention to Reduce Inappropriate psychotropic Drug use in nursing home residents with dementia

  Internal project leader N = 15
N, (%)
External coach N = 6 a
N, (%)
1) Researchers
 Added value tailored information provision b
  Strongly 9 (60%) 12 (75%)
  To a reasonable extent 5 (33%) 3 (19%)
  To some extent 1 (7%) 1 (6%)
2) Internal project leader
 Competence of project leader c perceived by coach
  Competent or very competent N.A. 9 (56%)
  Not competent/not incompetent N.A. 3 (19%)
  Other d N.A. 4 (25%)
3) External coach
 a) Added value of coaching b
  Strongly 7 (47%) 6 (38%)
  To a reasonable extent 6 (40%) 9 (56%)
  To some extent 2 (13%) 1 (6%)
 b) Coaching necessity for (continued) implementation
  Yes 5 (33%) 9 (56%)
  No 7 (47%) 4 (25%)
  I don’t know 3 (20%) 3 (19%)
 c) Competence of coach c perceived by project leader
  Competent or very competent 11 (73%) N.A.
  Not competent/not incompetent 1 (7%) N.A.
  Other d 3 (20%) N.A.
  1. a N = 6 coaches for N = 16 nursing homes
  2. b Scale: Not at all/to some extent/to a reasonable extent/strongly
  3. c Likert Scale: Very incompetent/incompetent/not competent-not incompetent/competent/very competent
  4. d Differences between competence in content and process, such as incompetent on content and competent on process