Health Research Policy and Systems最新文献

Background: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic caused significant global disruptions to the healthcare system, which was forced to make rapid changes in healthcare delivery. The pandemic necessitated closer collaboration between the US civilian healthcare sector and the military health system (MHS), resulting in new and strengthened partnerships that can ultimately benefit public health and healthcare for the nation. In this study, we sought to understand the full range of partnerships in which the MHS engaged with the civilian sector during the COVID-19 pandemic and to elicit lessons for the future.

Methods: We conducted key informant interviews with MHS policymakers and advisers, program managers and providers who were affiliated with the MHS from March 2020 through December 2022. Key themes were derived using thematic analysis and open coding methods.

Results: We conducted 28 interviews between December 2022 and March 2023. During the pandemic, the MHS collaborated with federal and local healthcare authorities and private sector entities through endeavours such as Operation Warp Speed. Lessons and recommendations for future pandemics were also identified, including investment in biosurveillance systems and integration of behavioural and social sciences.

Conclusions: The MHS rapidly established and fostered key partnerships with the public and private sectors during the COVID-19 pandemic. The pandemic experience showed that while the MHS is a useful resource for the nation, it also benefits from partnering with a variety of organizations, agencies and private companies. Continuing to develop these partnerships will be crucial for coordinated, effective responses to future pandemics.

Background: It is vital that health service delivery and health interventions address patients' needs or preferences, are relevant for practice and can be implemented. Involving those who will use or deliver healthcare in priority-setting can lead to health service delivery and research that is more meaningful and impactful. This is particularly crucial in rural communities, where limited resources and disparities in healthcare and health outcomes are often more pronounced. The aim of this study was to determine the health and healthcare priorities in rural communities using a region-wide community engagement approach.

Methods: This multi-methods study was conducted in five rural communities in the Grampians region, Western Victoria, Australia. It involved six concept mapping steps: (1) preparation, (2) generation (brainstorming statements and identifying rating criteria), (3) structuring statements (sorting and rating statements), (4) representation of statements, (5) interpretation of the concept map and (6) utilization. Community forums, surveys and stakeholder consultations with community members and health professionals were used in Step 2. An innovative online group concept mapping platform, involving consumers, health professionals and researchers was used in Step 3.

Results: Overall, 117 community members and 70 health professionals identified 400 health and healthcare issues. Six stakeholder consultation sessions (with 16 community members and 16 health professionals) identified three key values for prioritizing health issues: equal access for equal need, effectiveness and impact (number of people affected). Actionable priorities for healthcare delivery were largely related to access issues, such as the challenges navigating the healthcare system, particularly for people with mental health issues; the lack of sufficient general practitioners and other health providers; the high travel costs; and poor internet coverage often impacting technology-based interventions for people in rural areas.

Conclusions: This study identified actionable health and healthcare priorities from the perspective of healthcare service users and providers in rural communities in Western Victoria. Issues related to access, such as the inequities in healthcare costs, the perceived lack of quality and availability of services, particularly in mental health and disability, were identified as priorities. These insights can guide future research, policy-making and resource allocation efforts to improve healthcare access, quality and equity in rural communities.

Background: Paramedicine is a dynamic profession which has evolved from a "treat and transport" service into a complex network of health professionals working in a diverse range of clinical roles. Research is challenging in the paramedicine context, and internationally, research capacity and culture has developed slowly. International examples of research agendas and strategies in paramedicine exist, however, research priorities have not previously been identified in Ireland.

Methods: This study was a three round electronic modified Delphi design which aimed to establish the key aspects of the research priorities via end-user consensus. Participants included interested stakeholders involved in prehospital care or research in Ireland. The first round questionnaire consisted of open-ended questions with results coded and developed into themes for the closed-ended questions used in the second and third round questionnaires. A consensus level of 70% was set a priori for second and third rounds.

Results: Research Priorities that reached consensus included Staff Wellbeing, Education and Professionalism and Acute Medical Conditions. Respondents indicated that these three areas should be a priority in the next 2 years. Education, Staffing and Leadership were imperative Key Resources that required change. Education was a Key Processes change deemed imperative to allow the future research to occur. Outcomes that should be included in the future research strategy were Patient Outcomes, Practitioner Development, Practitioner Wellbeing, Alternate Pathways, Evidence-based Practice and Staff Satisfaction.

Conclusion: The results of this study are similar to previously published international studies, with some key differences. There was a greater emphasis on Education and Practitioner Wellbeing with the latter possibly attributed to the timing of the research in relation to the COVID-19 pandemic. The disseminated findings of this study should inform sustainable funding models to aid the development of paramedicine research in Ireland.

Background: Communication is a multifaceted process, ranging from linear, one-way approaches, such as transmitting a simple message, to continuous exchanges and feedback loops among stakeholders. In particular the COVID-19 pandemic underscored the critical need for timely, effective and credible evidence communication to increase awareness, levels of trust, and evidence uptake in policy and practice. However, whether to improve policy responses in crises or address more commonplace societal challenges, comprehensive guidance on evidence communication to decision-makers in health policies and systems remains limited. Our objective was to identify and systematize the global evidence on frameworks, guidance and tools supporting effective communication of research evidence to facilitate knowledge translation and evidence-informed policy-making processes, while also addressing barriers and facilitators.

Methods: We conducted a rapid scoping review following the Joanna Briggs Manual. Literature searches were performed across eight indexed databases and two sources of grey literature, without language or time restrictions. The methodological quality of included studies was assessed, and a narrative-interpretative synthesis was applied to present the findings.

Results: We identified 16 documents presenting either complete frameworks or framework components, including guidance and tools, aimed at supporting evidence communication for policy development. These frameworks outlined strategies, theoretical models, barriers and facilitators, as well as insights into policy-makers' perspectives, communication needs, and preferences. Three primary evidence communication strategies, comprising eleven sub-strategies, emerged: "Health information packaging", "Targeting and tailoring messages to the audience", and "Combined communication strategies". Based on the documented barriers and facilitators at micro, meso and macro levels, critical factors for successful communication of evidence to policy-makers were identified.

Conclusions: Effective communication is indispensable for facilitating knowledge translation and evidence-informed policy-making. Nonetheless gaps persist in frameworks designed to enhance research communication to policy-makers, particularly regarding the effectiveness of multiple communication strategies. To advance in this field, the development of comprehensive frameworks incorporating implementation strategies is warranted. Additionally, barriers and facilitators to implementing effective communication must be recognized and addressed taking diverse contexts into consideration. Registration https://zenodo.org/record/5578550.

Background: Racial inequities in severe maternal morbidity (SMM) and mortality constitute a public health crisis in the United States. Doula care, defined as care from birth workers who provide culturally appropriate, non-clinical support during pregnancy and postpartum, has been proposed as an intervention to help disrupt obstetric racism as a driver of adverse pregnancy outcomes in Black and other birthing persons of colour. Many state Medicaid programs are implementing doula programs to address the continued increase in SMM and mortality. Medicaid programs are poised to play a major role in addressing the needs of these populations with the goal of closing the racial gaps in SMM and mortality. This study will investigate the most effective ways that Medicaid programs can implement doula care to improve racial health equity.

Methods: We describe the protocol for a mixed-methods study to understand how variation in implementation of doula programs in Medicaid may affect racial equity in pregnancy and postpartum health. Primary study outcomes include SMM, person-reported measures of respectful obstetric care, and receipt of evidence-based care for chronic conditions that are the primary causes of postpartum mortality (cardiovascular, mental health, and substance use conditions). Our research team includes doulas, university-based investigators, and Medicaid participants from six sites (Kentucky, Maryland, Michigan, Pennsylvania, South Carolina and Virginia) in the Medicaid Outcomes Distributed Research Network (MODRN). Study data will include policy analysis of doula program implementation, longitudinal data from a cohort of doulas, cross-sectional data from Medicaid beneficiaries, and Medicaid healthcare administrative data. Qualitative analysis will examine doula and beneficiary experiences with healthcare systems and Medicaid policies. Quantitative analyses (stratified by race groups) will use matching techniques to estimate the impact of using doula care on postpartum health outcomes, and will use time-series analyses to estimate the average treatment effect of doula programs on population postpartum health outcomes.

Discussion: Findings will facilitate learning opportunities among Medicaid programs, doulas and Medicaid beneficiaries. Ultimately, we seek to understand the implementation and integration of doula care programs into Medicaid and how these processes may affect racial health equity. Study registration The study is registered with the Open Science Foundation ( https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/NXZUF ).

Introduction: Despite increased interest in learning health systems (LHS), a paucity of guidance and tools for evaluating LHS implementation exists. To address this, we aim to undertake a scoping review on existing tools and evaluation of exemplars of LHS implementation.

Methods: We conducted a scoping review of peer-reviewed studies within Scopus, EMBASE, MEDLINE, and MEDLINE in-process that described (1) the evaluation of the implementation of an operating LHS or (2) the development of a framework or tool to facilitate this evaluation. Anima, basic research, abstracts, non-English language articles, and publications before 2018 were excluded. All study designs were considered.

Findings: From 1300 studies initially identified, 4 were eligible, revealing three tools with nine implementation evaluation examples. The identified tools shared constructs which were evaluated, including: Stakeholders, Data, Research Evidence, Implementation, and Sociotechnical Infrastructure. However, there was divergence in evaluation methodology. Tools ranged from a five-point numerical rating system for process maturity with a radar chart called the Network Maturity Grid (NMG); the Kaiser Permanente Washington (KPWA) LHS Logic Model, which provides a broad list of constructs and sample measures relevant to LHS operations; and finally LADDERS, a simple tool or form-based template designed for consistent evaluation over time. The NMG tool was the most mature in terms of adaptation and adoption. Notably, two (NMG and the KPWA LHS Logic Model) out of three tools conceptualized the LHS as a suite of processes and devised tools were processes that linked these constructs.

Implications for toolkit development: The evaluation of LHS implementation remains an under explored area of investigation, as this scoping review found only three tools for LHS implementation evaluation. Our findings indicate a need for further empirical research in this area and suggest early consensus in constructs that need to be considered during evaluation.