Rosie Webster*, University College London, London, United Kingdom Susan Michie, University College London, London, United Kingdom Claudia Estcourt, Barts Health NHS Trust, London, United Kingdom Makeda Gerressu, University College London, London, United Kingdom Julia Bailey, University College London, London, United Kingdom Track: Research Presentation Topic: Web 2.0 approaches for behaviour change, public health and biosurveillance Presentation Type: Oral presentation Submission Type: Single Presentation Building: Sheraton Maui Resort Room: C - Napili Date: 2014-11-13 04:15 PM – 05:15 PM Last modified: 2014-10-24

If you are the presenter of this abstract (or if you cite this abstract in a talk or on a poster), please show the QR code in your slide or poster (QR code contains this URL).

Background: Increasing condom use in sexual health clinics is a key public health goal. Digital interventions are well-suited to sexual health promotion, as they require little staff time or training, and access can be anonymous. Online behaviour change interventions are more likely to be effective if they are designed using a framework that reflects current knowledge of mechanisms of change. The Behaviour Change Wheel (BCW) provides a framework for planning intervention development, so that intervention design can be underpinned by evidence and behaviour change theory. We provide a practical example of using the BCW to design a digital intervention to increase condom use in men (the Men’s Safer Sex website, MenSS).
Objective: To provide a practical example of how the BCW may be used to develop a theory- and evidence-based digital intervention to increase condom use in men.
Methods: The website content was informed by a literature review of men’s barriers to, and facilitators of, condom use, two workshops with experts in sexual health (N = 16), and interviews with men in sexual health clinics (N = 20), all of which were analysed thematically. This information was collated and organised using the BCW, to identify potential targets for the intervention. This included current barriers to condom use that needed to be modified by the intervention (e.g. lack of knowledge about risk; beliefs about the consequences of condom use, such as reduced pleasure), and potential facilitators of condom use (e.g. fostering a positive identity associated with being a ‘condom user’). Interactive website features were then devised, using a number of behaviour change techniques (BCTs) to prompt behaviour change.
Findings: Organising information into the BCW framework facilitated the process of selecting behavioural influences to target, selecting suitable BCTs, and designing the interactive website features. Findings from the literature and field work informed the content and features of the intervention. For example, reduced pleasure was a prominent motivational barrier to condom use, so information on how to increase pleasure with condoms was included in the website. A lack of knowledge about condom sizes and types was found to be important, so a feature was devised which offers personalised condom type recommendations, based on users’ own personal problems with condoms. A lack of accurate knowledge about risk levels was common, so we therefore developed interactive quizzes and graphics to demonstrate that risk of STI may be misjudged. Difficulty using condoms in ‘the heat of the moment’ was a prominent barrier to condom use, so the website provided action planning strategies to overcome this.
Discussion: The BCW provides a useful framework for integrating information from several sources, and helps intervention designers to be clear about what behaviours and behavioural influences to target, why, and how.