Abstract
The ease with which programs can be delivered may impact sustainability, fidelity, and ultimately program effectiveness in a dissemination environment. This paper presents results from a study examining the ability of technological enhancements to make it easier for teachers to deliver All Stars, an evidence-based drug prevention program. These enhancements were designed to save time for teachers, produce improvements in quality of delivery, and provide features to increase students’ involvement. Results of a randomized field trial revealed that teachers who used the enhancements found it easier to implement key program components compared to facilitators who taught the program as usual. Teachers in the technology-enhanced condition reduced the time required to complete otherwise time-consuming tasks. They also reported the ability to deliver more of the program, although they also reported more modifications and omitted activities within sessions when compared to teachers who delivered the program as usual. Moreover, teachers’ attitudes about the program improved after their experience with the enhancements, the vast majority wishing to continue to use them in the future. Results suggest that modest gains in quality of program delivery can be expected when online applications designed to make tasks easier can be adopted by prevention service providers. On the other hand, enhancements that require special skill sets regarding computer-based methods may provide no clear benefit.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Abbott, R. D., O, , Donnell, I., Hawkins, D., Hill, K. G., Kosterman, R., & Catalano, R. F. (1998). Changing teaching practices to promote achievement and bonding to school. The American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 68, 542–552. doi:10.1037/h0080363.
Backer, T. E. (2001). Finding the balance: Program fidelity and adaptation in substance abuse prevention: A state-of-the-art review. Center for Substance Abuse Prevention, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration: Rockville, MD.
Bangert-Drowns, R. L. (1988). The effects of school-based substance abuse education. A meta-analysis. Journal of Drug Education, 18, 243–264.
Bauman, L. J., Stein, R. E. K., & Ireys, H. T. (1991). Reinventing fidelity: The transfer of social technology among settings. American Journal of Community Psychology, 19, 619–639. doi:10.1007/BF00937995.
Bishop, D. C., Bryant, K. S., Giles, S. M., Hansen, W. B., & Dusenbury, L. (2006). Simplifying the delivery of a prevention program with web-based enhancements. The Journal of Primary Prevention, 27, 433–444. doi:10.1007/s10935-006-0042-z.
Botvin, G. J., Baker, E., Dusenbury, L., Tortu, S., & Botvin, E. M. (1990). Preventing adolescent drug abuse through a multimodal cognitive-behavioral approach: Results of a three-year study. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 58, 437–446. doi:10.1037/0022-006X.58.4.437.
Botvin, G. J., & Botvin, E. M. (1997). School-based and community-based prevention approaches. In J. Lowinson, P. Ruiz, & R. Millman (Eds.), Comprehensive textbook of substance abuse (pp. 910–927)). Baltimore, MD: Williams & Wilkins.
Bruvold, W. H. (1993). A meta-analysis of adolescent smoking prevention programs. American Journal of Public Health, 83, 872–880.
Charter, R. A. (1999). Sample size requirements for precise estimates of reliability, generalizability, and validity coefficients. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 21, 559–566. doi:10.1076/jcen.21.4.559.889.
Dusenbury, L., & Falco, M. (1995). Eleven components of effective drug abuse prevention curricula. The Journal of School Health, 65, 420–425.
Dusenbury, L., Brannigan, R., Falco, M., & Hansen, W. B. (2003). A review of research on fidelity of implementation: Implications for drug abuse prevention in school settings. Health Education Research, 18, 237–256. doi:10.1093/her/18.2.237.
Dusenbury, L., Brannigan, R., Hansen, W. B., Walsh, J., & Falco, M. (2005). Quality of implementation: Developing measures crucial to understanding the diffusion of preventive interventions. Health Education Research, 20, 308–313. doi:10.1093/her/cyg134.
Fagan, A. A., Hanson, K., Hawkins, J. D., & Arthur, M. W. (2008). Implementing effective community-based prevention programs in the Community Youth Development Study. Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice, 6, 256–278. doi:10.1177/1541204008315937.
Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford University Press.
Hallfors, D., & Godette, D. (2002). Principles of effectiveness improve prevention practice? Early findings from a diffusion study. Health Education Research, 17, 461–470. doi:10.1093/her/17.4.461.
Hansen, W. B. (1992). School-based substance abuse prevention: A review of the state of the art in curriculum, 1980–1990. Health Education Research, 7, 403–430. doi:10.1093/her/7.3.403.
Hansen, W. B. (1996). Psychosocial approaches to prevention: Using epidemiology and etiology research to develop strategies to develop effective interventions. Psicología Conductual, 3, 357–378.
Hansen, W. B., Graham, J. W., Wolkenstein, B. H., & Rohrbach, L. A. (1991). Program integrity as a moderator of prevention program effectiveness. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 52, 568–579.
Hansen, W. B., & McNeal, R. B. (1996). The law of maximum expected potential effect: Constraints placed on program effectiveness by mediator relationships. Health Education Research, 11, 501–507. doi:10.1093/her/11.4.501.
Harrington, N. G., Giles, S. M., Hoyle, R. H., Feeney, G. H., & Yungbluth, S. C. (2001). Evaluation of the All Stars character education and problem behavior prevention program: Pretest-post-test effects on mediator and outcome variables for middle school students. Health Education & Behavior, 28, 533–546. doi:10.1177/109019810102800502.
Hill, L. G., Maucione, K., & Hood, B. (2007). A focused approach to assessing program fidelity. Prevention Science, 8, 25–34. doi:10.1007/s11121-006-0051-4.
Luborsky, L., & DeBubeis, R. J. (1984). The use of psychotherapy treatment manuals: A small revolution in psychotherapy research style. Clinical Psychology Review, 4, 5–14. doi:10.1016/0272-7358(84)90034-5.
McNeal, R. B., Hansen, W. B., Harrington, N. G., & Giles, S. M. (2004). How All Stars works: An examination of program effects on mediating variables. Health Education & Behavior, 31, 165–178. doi:10.1177/1090198103259852.
Mihalic, S. F., Fagan, A. A., & Argamaso, S. (2008). Implementing the Life Skill Training drug prevention program: Factors related to implementation fidelity. Implementation Science; IS, 3 doi:10.1186/1748-5908-3-5
Mrazek, P. J., & Haggerty, R. J. (Eds.).(1994). Reducing risk for mental disorders: Frontiers for preventive intervention research. Washington, D.C.: Institute of Medicine, National Academy Press.
Murray, D. (1998). Sample size, detectable difference and power. In D. Murray (Ed.), Design and analysis of group -randomized trials (pp. 349-412). New York: Oxford University Press.
Pankratz, M., Jackson-Newsom, J., Giles, S. M., Ringwalt, C. L., Bliss, K., & Bell, M. L. (2006). Implementation fidelity in a teacher-led alcohol use prevention curriculum. Journal of Drug Education, 36, 317–333. doi:10.2190/H210-2N47-5X5T-21U4.
Pentz, M. A., Trebow, E. A., Hansen, W. B., MacKinnon, D. P., Dwyer, J. H., Johnson, C. A., et al. (1990). Effects of program implementation on adolescent drug use behavior. Adolescent Drug Use Behavior, 14, 264–289.
Perry, C. L., & Kelder, S. H. (1992). Models for effective prevention. The Journal of Adolescent Health, 13, 355–363. doi:10.1016/1054-139X(92)90028-A.
Resnicow, K., & Botvin, G. J. (1993). School-based substance use prevention programs: Why do effects decay? Preventive Medicine: An International Journal Devoted to Practice and Theory, 22, 484–490.
Ringwalt, C. L., Ennett, S. T., Johnson, R., Rohrbach, L. A., Simons-Rudolph, A. P., Vincus, A. A., et al. (2003). Factors associated with fidelity to substance use prevention curriculum guides. Health Education & Behavior, 30, 375–391. doi:10.1177/1090198103030003010.
Rohrbach, L. A., Graham, J. W., & Hansen, W. B. (1993). Diffusion of a school-based substance abuse prevention program: Predictors of program implementation. Preventive Medicine, 22, 237–260. doi:10.1006/pmed.1993.1020.
Rohrbach, L. A., Dent, C., Skara, S., Sun, P., & Sussman, S. (2007). Fidelity of implementation in Project Toward No Drug Abuse (TND): A comparison of classroom teachers and program specialists. Prevention Science, 8, 125–132. doi:10.1007/s11121-006-0056-z.
Rokeach, M. (1968). Beliefs, Attitudes, and Values. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Tobler, N. S., & Stratton, H. H. (1997). Effectiveness of school-based drug prevention programs: A meta-analysis of the research. The Journal of Primary Prevention, 18, 71–128. doi:10.1023/A:1024630205999.
Yeaton, W. H., & Sechrest, L. (1981). Critical dimensions in the choice and maintenance of successful treatments. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 49, 156–167. doi:10.1037/0022-006X.49.2.156.
Acknowledgement
This project was funded in part by a grant from the National Institute on Drug Abuse, grant number R44 DA015281, William B. Hansen, Ph.D., Principal Investigator.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Hansen, W.B., Bishop, D.C. & Bryant, K.S. Using Online Components to Facilitate Program Implementation: Impact of Technological Enhancements to All Stars on Ease and Quality of Program Delivery. Prev Sci 10, 66–75 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11121-008-0118-5
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11121-008-0118-5