Table 2.
Self-reported feasibility, acceptability, and appropriateness of the EpiFIT intervention measured using the FIM, AIM, and IAM (n=6).
| Measures | Mean (SD)a | ||
| Feasibility of Intervention Measures (FIM) | |||
|
|
EpiFIT seems implementable | 4.50 (0.55) | |
|
|
EpiFIT seems possible | 4.67 (0.52) | |
|
|
EpiFIT seems doable | 4.50 (0.55) | |
|
|
EpiFIT seems easy to use | 4.17 (0.98) | |
| Acceptability of Intervention Measure (AIM) | |||
|
|
EpiFIT meets my approval | 4.33 (0.82) | |
|
|
EpiFIT is appealing to me | 4.33 (0.52) | |
|
|
I like EpiFIT | 4.50 (0.84) | |
|
|
I welcome EpiFIT | 4.17 (0.75) | |
| Intervention Appropriateness Measure (IAM) | |||
|
|
EpiFIT seems fitting | 4.50 (0.84) | |
|
|
EpiFIT seems suitable | 4.33 (0.82) | |
|
|
EpiFIT seems applicable | 4.33 (0.82) | |
|
|
EpiFIT seems like a good match | 4.50 (0.84) | |
aAll questions have a range of 1-5.