Systematic adaptation of public health palliative care interventions across settings using ADAPT guidance: Methodological learnings from the EU NAVIGATE project.

Abstract

Systematic adaptation of evidence-informed interventions is critical for effective transfer across settings. Public health palliative care interventions pose unique challenges because of their complexity and embedding in dynamic, real-life settings. The ADAPT guidance provides a comprehensive framework for systematically adapting evidence-informed health interventions, yet its application in public health palliative care remains unexplored. Within the EU NAVIGATE project, this study describes the international adaptation process of a Canadian navigation program supporting older people with cancer experiencing declining health, for implementation in six European countries. It also reflects on the methodological insights gained from applying the ADAPT guidance in public health palliative care. Using an iterative five-stage multi-method approach, we followed the ADAPT guidance and its recommended frameworks. Stage 1 assessed context-intervention fit and identified core and adaptable components of the original intervention. Stage 2 adapted implementation materials, while stage 3 involved a contextual analysis. Stage 4 focused on adapting the training for implementers, and stage 5 reviewed feasibility. The ADAPT guidance proved flexible and useful, though systematic adaptation posed challenges due to the unique complexities of public health palliative care interventions. These included balancing intervention integrity with cultural sensitivities and local juridical regulations regarding end of life. Our process addressed these challenges through contextual assessments, identifying core components, engaging with original developers, and collaboration between local and international adaptation teams. A systematic adaptation process, guided by the ADAPT guidance is feasible, but transferring public health palliative care interventions requires careful methodological, contextual, and conceptual considerations.