Table 1

Data collection methods used to address each aim and question of the process evaluation

AimsData collection method
iiiiiiivvvi
Aim 1: Explain the trial results in terms of fidelity and engagement:
1.1 Were the intervention and control arms delivered as intended:
GPsXXXX
PatientsXXXXXX
CSTXX
1.2 What did ‘usual care’ entail?
GPsXX
PatientsXX
1.3 What types of issues were discussed or actioned during the interactions between the CST/GPs and the patients?
GPsXX
CSTXXXX
1.4 Participants and healthcare professionals’ perspectives on how, why and for whom the interactions did or did not work? (semistructured qualitative interviews).
GPsX
CSTX
PatientsX
1.5 Were the primary and secondary outcome effects due to the nature of the implementation or to the intervention?
GPsXX
PatientsXXXX
Aim 2: Feasibility and acceptability of scaling the intervention in Australia
2.1 What are the possible barriers and enablers to rolling-out the model in Australian primary care?
GPsXX
PatientsXX
2.2 Do patients and GPs value the intervention as delivered?X
GPsX
PatientsX
2.3 Are the results generalisable to other patients with OA, healthcare service providers and across states?
XX
2.4 Is the intervention cost-effective compared with usual care?
PatientsXXX
  • i. Analysis of inclusion / exlusion criteria, screening logs and withdrawal logs.

  • ii. Analysis of the quantitative data collected in electonic surveys for both the GPs and patients with OA.

  • iii. Analysis of a sample of recorded telephone interactions between the CST responsible for providing the intervention and the patients with OA

  • iv. Audit of data collected over the trial (the electronic consultation notes) that captures the number, length and nature of the interactions between the CST and patients with OA.

  • v. Semi-structured interviews with patient participants and the GPs and CST involved in the study.

  • vi. Audit of training logs and other activity logs for GPs in the intervention group. This includes analysis of web usage statistics.