Table 1.
RE-AIM Evaluation for Denver HANDDS Program
| Evaluation Measure | Proposed Strategies to Enhance Overall Impact | Outcome Measures to Evaluate Impact | Denver HANDDS Program |
|---|---|---|---|
| REACH: Extent of representativeness of participants | A. Clearly defined target population and numbers of people eligible for he intervention. | Proportion of residents from high-risk neighborhoods who participated in CPR intervention. | 344 participants |
| B. Major barriers and facilitators to CPR intervention identified in step 2 to develop targeted intervention. | Number of settings willing and unwilling to host intervention. Number of residents from high-risk neighborhoods who participated. | No settings were unwilling to host the intervention. 344 participants |
|
| EFFECTIVENESS: Short-term impact/outcomes for participants | A. Tailored messaging approach based on community recommendations. | Postintervention survey assessing the participants' satisfaction with the training, knowledge acquisition, and recommendations for improvement. | Increase in knowledge acquisition from 1.71 (±1.31) to 3.96 (±1.07) out of possible five questions. |
| B. Reinforced CPR intervention with direct training and take-home kit. | In-person follow-up at 2 to 4 weeks to understand how participants felt training family and friends. | 80% of family and friends feel comfortable performing hands-only CPR. | |
| ADOPTION: Interface between researchers and potential program settings | A. Settings for intervention based on community input. | Record which settings were willing or unwilling to participate and why. | Not applicable |
| B. Intervention can be easily conducted in multiple settings with few resources. | Record which settings initially participated and then dropped out and why. | Not applicable | |
| C. Commitment to piloting intervention from key community organizations. | Number of formal local collaborations established by the end of the intervention period. | Continuation of two community-based programs in stroke and hypertension in same populations. | |
| IMPLEMENTATION: Fidelity or intervention integrity | A. Meet with participants who completed the CPR intervention to understand how to make intervention better. | Record number of participants who complete the follow-ups. | 154 participants (44.8% response rate) |
| MAINTENANCE: Both individual participant and program/setting level | A. Reduce level of resources needed for starting and maintaining this type of project. | Creation of a “how-to guide” for the entire intervention that can then be “taken off the shelf” and used in other communities. | In process |
| B. Work with existing network of community organizations locally to develop sustainability plan. | Number of formal local collaborations established by the end of the intervention period. | Continuation of two community-based programs in stroke and hypertension in same populations. |
HANDDS = identifying High Arrest Neighborhoods to Decrease Disparities in Survival; RE-AIM = Reach Effectiveness Adoption Implementation Maintenance.