Health Research Policy and Systems最新文献

Background: Mental health conditions affect one in seven young people and research suggests that current mental health services are not meeting the needs of most children and youth. Learning health systems are an approach to enhancing services through rapid, routinized cycles of continuous learning and improvement. Patient-reported outcome measures provide a key data source for learning health systems. They have also been shown to improve outcomes for patients when integrated into routine clinical care. However, implementing these measures into health systems is a challenging process. This paper describes a protocol for a formative evaluation of the implementation of patient-reported measures in a newly operational child and adolescent mental health centre in Calgary, Canada. The purpose is to optimize the collection and use of patient-reported outcome measures. Our specific objectives are to assess the implementation progress, identify barriers and facilitators to implementation, and explore patient, caregivers and clinician experiences of using these measures in routine clinical care.

Methods: This study is a mixed-methods, formative evaluation using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. Participants include patients and caregivers who have used the centre's services, as well as leadership, clinical and support staff at the centre. Focus groups and semi-structured interviews will be conducted to assess barriers and facilitators to the implementation and sustainability of the use of patient-reported outcome measures, as well as individuals' experiences with using these measures within clinical care. The data generated by the patient-reported measures over the first five months of the centre's operation will be analyzed to understand implementation progress, as well as validity of the chosen measures for the centres' population.

Discussion: The findings of this evaluation will help to identify and address the factors that are affecting the successful implementation of patient-reported measures at the centre. They will inform the co-design of strategies to improve implementation with key stakeholders, which include patients, clinical staff, and leadership at the centre. To our knowledge, this is the first study of the implementation of patient-reported outcome measures in child and adolescent mental health services and our findings can be used to enhance future implementation efforts in similar settings.

Background: Health policymaking is a critical aspect of governmental decision-making that shapes the well-being of populations. In the Middle East and North Africa, particularly in Kuwait, limited attention has been given to exploring the research capacities, engagement, and utilization among health policymakers. This study aims to bridge this gap by investigating how Kuwaiti health policymakers incorporate evidence-based research into the formulation of health-related policies.

Methods: This cross-sectional study targeted health policymakers in leadership positions within the Kuwait Ministry of Health (MOH). Using the Seeking, Engaging with and Evaluating Research (SEER) questionnaire, participants' capacities, engagement, and use of research were assessed. The targeted sample was all health policymakers in leadership positions, starting from the head of departments and above. The questionnaire comprises four domains, 14 sections, and 50 questions and utilizes Likert and binary scales, with aggregate scores predicting engagement actions and research use. The data were collected between March and July 2023. All the statistical analyses were performed using SPSS v27, and the numerical and categorical variables were analyzed using appropriate statistical tests, including t-tests, ANOVA, and Pearson's correlation.

Results: Out of 205 policymakers, 88 participated (42.9% response rate): predominantly male (51.1%) and married (78.4%). The mean age was 49.84 ± 7.28 years, with a mean MOH tenure of 24.39 ± 6.80 years. Participants demonstrated high value for research (mean score 4.29 ± 0.55) and expressed confidence in the research utilization. Organizational emphasis on research use exhibited nuanced perceptions, identifying areas where MOH support may be lacking. Access to research resources and processes for policy development guidance were highlighted as challenges.

Conclusions: This study provides crucial insights into the research capacities and engagement of Kuwaiti health policymakers. It emphasizes the need for targeted interventions to align individual perceptions with organizational expectations, address confidence disparities, and enhance collaborative efforts. Organizational investments are crucial for fostering a dynamic research ecosystem to improve evidence-based policy development in Kuwait's healthcare landscape.

Background: Adverse childhood experiences can impact physical and mental health throughout the lifespan. To support families experiencing adversity and improve child health and developmental equity, an integrated, multi-sector response is required. Child and Family Hubs (Hubs) are a feasible and acceptable approach to providing such a response. In the Australian context, a number of federal and New South Wales (NSW) state policies support an integrated, multi-sector response using Hubs to support families experiencing adversity. This study examined NSW policy stakeholder and health service manager perspectives on the barriers and enablers to translating policy into practice in the implementation of Child and Family Hubs.

Methods: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 11 NSW government policy stakeholders and 13 community health service managers working in child and family policy and planning or child and family community-based services. Interviews were of 30-60 min duration and explored stakeholder knowledge, perspectives and experiences around childhood adversity, and barriers and enablers to operationalizing policies supporting Hubs. Analysis of barriers and facilitators to implementation of Hub models of care was undertaken using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR).

Results: Key barriers that emerged included short-term and inconsistent funding, lack of resourcing for a Hub co-ordinator, limited support for evaluation and insufficient time to plan for Hub implementation. Key enablers included flexibility and adaptability of Hub models to meet local needs, formal change management processes, strong governance structures and engagement among Hub practitioners. Key insights included the importance of targeted strategies to support sustained individual practice change and the need for organization-wide commitment to enable the successful adoption and maintenance of the Hub model of care.

Conclusions: This study provides valuable insights and contributes evidence around what is needed to strengthen and support the operationalization and scalability of the Hub model of care. Key recommendations for Hub practitioners include the importance of formal change management processes and establishment of strong governance structures, while key recommendations for policymakers include the need for sustainable Hub funding and a standardized, evidence-based framework to support Hub implementation and evaluation.

Background: Scientific research and innovation can generate societal impact via different pathways. Productive interactions, such as collaboration between researchers and relevant stakeholders, play an important role and have increasingly gained interest of health funders around the globe. What works, how and why in research partnerships to generate societal impact in terms of knowledge utilisation is still not well-known. To explore these issues, the Netherlands Organization for Health Research and Development (ZonMw) initiated an exploratory research-on-research study with a focus on participatory knowledge infrastructures (PKIs) that they fund in the field of public health and healthcare. PKIs are sustainable infrastructures in which knowledge production, dissemination and utilisation takes place via committed collaboration between researchers and stakeholders from policy, practice and/or education. Examples are learning networks, academic collaborative centres, care networks and living labs. The aim of the study was twofold: to gain insights in what constitutes effective collaboration in PKIs; and to learn and improve the research governance, particularly of ZonMw as part of their dissemination and implementation activities.

Methods: During 2020-2022, we conducted a literature review on long-term research partnerships, analysed available documentation of twenty ZonMw-funded PKIs, surveyed participants of the 2021 European Implementation Event, interviewed steering committee members, organized a Group Decision Room with lecturers, and validated the findings with key experts.

Results: We identified eight mechanisms ('how and why') that are conditional for effective collaboration in PKIs: transdisciplinary collaboration; defining a shared ambition; doing justice to everyone's interests; investing in personal relationships; a professional organisation or structure; a meaningful collaborative process; mutual trust, sufficient time for and continuity of collaboration. Several factors ('what') may hinder (e.g., lack of ownership or structural funding) or facilitate (e.g., stakeholder commitment, embeddedness in an organisation or policy) effective collaboration in research partnerships.

Conclusion: To use the study results in policy, practice, education, and/or (further) research, cultural and behavioural change of all stakeholders is needed. To facilitate this, we provide recommendations for funding organisations, particularly ZonMw and its partners within the relevant knowledge ecosystem. It is meant as a roadmap towards the realisation and demonstration of societal impact of (health) research and innovation in the upcoming years.

Background: The link between public health spending (PHS) and population health outcomes (PHO) has been extensively studied. However, in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA), the moderating effects of governance in this relationship are little known. Furthermore, studies have focused on mortality as the main health outcome. This study contributes to this literature by investigating the moderating role of governance in the relationship by simultaneously assessing three dimensions of governance (corruption control, government effectiveness and voice accountability) using disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) as a measure of outcomes.

Methods: The study applies the two-stage moderation approach using partial least squares structural equation modelling (PLS-SEM) to panel data from 43 SSA nations from 2013 to 2019. The study also uses domestic general government health expenditure (DGGHE) as an independent variable and disability-adjusted life years (DALY) as the dependent variable in this relationship.

Results: The analysis reveals that DGGHE affects DALY negatively and that governance improves the effect of DGGHE on DALY, with bigger improvements among countries with worse governance.

Conclusion: These findings provide evidence that good governance is crucial to the effectiveness of PHS in SSA nations. Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) countries should improve governance to improve population health.

Background: Globally, a growing number of calls to formalize and strengthen evidence-support systems have been released, all of which emphasize the importance of evidence-informed decision making. To achieve this, it is critical that evidence producers and decision-makers interact, and that decision-makers' evidence needs can be efficiently translated into questions to which evidence producers can respond. This paper aims to create a taxonomy of demand-driven questions for use by evidence producers, intermediaries (i.e., people working in between researchers and decision-makers) and decision-makers.

Methods: We conducted a global cross-sectional survey of units providing some type of evidence support at the explicit request of decision-makers. Unit representatives were invited to answer an online questionnaire where they were asked to provide a list of the questions that they have addressed through their evidence-support mechanism. Descriptive analyses were used to analyze the survey responses, while the questions collected from each unit were iteratively analyzed to create a mutually exclusive and collectively exhaustive list of types of questions that can be answered with some form of evidence.

Results: Twenty-nine individuals completed the questionnaire, and more than 250 submitted questions were analysed to create a taxonomy of 41 different types of demand-driven questions. These 41 questions were organized by the goal to be achieved, and the goals were grouped in the four decision-making stages (i) clarifying a societal problem, its causes and potential impacts; (ii) finding and selecting options to address a problem; (iii) implementing or scaling-up an option; and (iv) monitoring implementation and evaluating impacts.

Conclusion: The mutually exclusive and collectively exhaustive list of demand-driven questions will help decision-makers (to ask and prioritize questions), evidence producers (to organize and present their work), and evidence-intermediaries (to connect evidence needs with evidence supply).

Background: Development of guidelines for public health, health system, and health policy interventions demands complex systems thinking to understand direct and indirect effects of interventions within dynamic systems. The WHO-INTEGRATE framework, an evidence-to-decision framework rooted in the norms and values of the World Health Organization (WHO), provides a structured method to assess complexities in guidelines systematically, such as the balance of an intervention's health benefits and harms and their human rights and socio-cultural acceptability. This paper provides a worked example of the application of the WHO-INTEGRATE framework in developing the WHO guidelines on parenting interventions to prevent child maltreatment, and shares reflective insights regarding the value added, challenges encountered, and lessons learnt.

Methods: The methodological approach comprised describing the intended step-by-step application of the WHO-INTEGRATE framework and gaining reflective insights from introspective sessions within the core team guiding the development of the WHO guidelines on parenting interventions and a methodological workshop.

Results: The WHO-INTEGRATE framework was used throughout the guideline development process. It facilitated reflective deliberation across a broad range of decision criteria and system-level aspects in the following steps: (1) scoping the guideline and defining stakeholder engagement, (2) prioritising WHO-INTEGRATE sub-criteria and guideline outcomes, (3) using research evidence to inform WHO-INTEGRATE criteria, and (4) developing and presenting recommendations informed by WHO-INTEGRATE criteria. Despite the value added, challenges, such as substantial time investment required, broad scope of prioritised sub-criteria, integration across diverse criteria, and sources of evidence and translation of insights into concise formats, were encountered.

Conclusions: Application of the WHO-INTEGRATE framework was crucial in the integration of effectiveness evidence with insights into implementation and broader implications of parenting interventions, extending beyond health benefits and harms considerations and fostering a whole-of-society-perspective. The evidence reviews for prioritised WHO-INTEGRATE sub-criteria were instrumental in guiding guideline development group discussions, informing recommendations and clarifying uncertainties. This experience offers important lessons for future guideline panels and guideline methodologists using the WHO-INTEGRATE framework.

Background: In Latin America, interventions aimed at adolescents' health suffer from a shortfall of investment and lack of sustainability. Nurses, as an integral part of health services and systems, can lead the implementation and development of public health policies to improve adolescent health.

Objective: To identify and analyze the role of nurses in the development and implementation of public policies and in the provision of health care to adolescents in Colombia, Ecuador, and Peru.

Methods: The research was carried out in three phases: a documentary analysis, an online survey, and semi-structured focus groups. A total of 48 documents were analyzed, 288 nurses participated in the survey, and 29 nurses participated in the focus groups.

Results: State policies aim to guarantee rights, with special protection for children and adolescents. It is an incremental process, with greater involvement of civil society and governments. Participants reported a lack of synergy between law and practice, as well as differences in regulatory compliance in rural areas and in populations of different ethnicities and cultures. Their perception was that the protection of adolescents is not specifically enshrined in the legal bases and regulatory structures of the countries, meaning that there are both protective factors and tensions in the regulatory framework. While nurses are highly committed to different actions aimed at adolescents, their participation in policy development and implementation is low, with barriers related to a lack of specialized training and working conditions.

Conclusions: Given nurses' involvement in different actions aimed at adolescents, they could play a fundamental role in the development of policies for adolescents and ensure their effective implementation. Policymakers should consider revising the budget to make compliance viable, incorporating and using monitoring indicators, and increasing the involvement of educational institutions and the community.

Healthcare professionals have first-hand experience with patients in clinical practice and the dynamics in the healthcare system, which can be of great value in the design, implementation, data analysis and dissemination of research study results. Primary care professionals are particularly important as they provide first contact, accessible, coordinated, comprehensive and continuous people-focused care. However, in-depth examination of the engagement of health professionals in health system research and planning activities-how professionals are engaged and how this varies across national contexts- is limited, particularly in international initiatives. There is a need to identify gaps in the planning of engagement activities to inform the design and successful implementation of future international efforts to improve the responsiveness of health systems to the changing needs of patients and professionals. The aim of this study was to explore how primary care professionals were engaged in the design and implementation plans of an international health policy study led by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). The OECD's international PaRIS survey measures and disseminates information on patient-reported outcome and experience measures (PROMs and PREMs) of people living with chronic conditions who are managed in primary care. A documentary analysis of 17 written national implementation plans (country roadmaps) was conducted between January and June 2023. Two reviewers independently performed the screening and data abstraction and resolved disagreements by discussion. We reported the intended target primary care professionals, phase of the study, channel of engagement, level of engagement, and purpose of engagement. All 17 countries aimed to engage primary care professionals in the execution plans for the international PaRIS survey. While organisations of primary care professionals, particularly of family doctors, were the most commonly targeted group, variation was found in the timing of engagement activities during the different phases of the study and in the level of engagement, ranging from co-development (half of the countries co-developed the survey together with primary care professionals) to one-off consultations with whom. International guidance facilitated the participation of primary care professionals. Continuous collaborative efforts at the international and national levels can foster a culture of engagement with primary care organisations and individual professionals and enhance meaningful engagement of primary care professionals.