Dataset Information

Global service learning and health systems strengthening: An integrative literature review.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

The sustainability of many global interventions, in the absence of adequate local financial and human resources to sustain them in the long term, is questioned. In response, there has been a shift in focus among global health actors towards the strengthening of local health systems via global service learning to effectively, efficiently and sustainably deliver healthcare and build capacity. There has been considerable research examining the benefits of global service learning experiences for students, but limited research has been conducted to determine the impact that health sciences global service learning experiences are having on the host country health systems.

Main text

An integrative review of the literature was conducted to examine the linkages between global service-learning and health systems strengthening. A comprehensive search of international literature from 2005 to 2017 in PubMed, CINAHL, Embase, ERIC, Scopus and Web of Science databases was conducted. The search was limited to peer-reviewed articles published in English language. Thematic analysis revealed three key themes: a dominant service-LEARNING typology, a unidirectional pattern from high-income to low and middle-income countries, and the preeminence of the nursing discipline in global service learning. There was limited evidence on sustainability and health systems strengthening.

Conclusions

The healthcare workforce of the future is willing to meet the challenges facing health systems across the globe. Global service-learning has yet to be examined in the context of health systems strengthening and particularly within a context of reciprocity. The onus is on higher education institutions in high-income countries to develop and deliver evidence-based global service-learning that is beneficial and engaging for students while most effectively meeting the need of the global community.

SUBMITTER: Beaman A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6082917 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundMillions of dollars are invested annually under the umbrella of national health systems strengthening. Global health initiatives provide funding for low- and middle-income countries through disease-oriented programmes while maintaining that the interventions simultaneously strengthen systems. However, it is as yet unclear which, and to what extent, system-level interventions are being funded by these initiatives, nor is it clear how much funding they allocate to disease-specific activities - through conventional 'vertical-programming' approach. Such funding can be channelled to one or more of the health system building blocks while targeting disease(s) or explicitly to system-wide activities.MethodsWe operationalized the World Health Organization health system framework of the six building blocks to conduct a detailed assessment of Global Fund health system investments. Our application of this framework framework provides a comprehensive quantification of system-level interventions. We applied this systematically to a random subset of 52 of the 139 grants funded in Round 8 of the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria (totalling approximately US$1 billion).ResultsAccording to the analysis, 37% (US$ 362 million) of the Global Fund Round 8 funding was allocated to health systems strengthening. Of that, 38% (US$ 139 million) was for generic system-level interventions, rather than disease-specific system support. Around 82% of health systems strengthening funding (US$ 296 million) was allocated to service delivery, human resources, and medicines & technology, and within each of these to two to three interventions. Governance, financing, and information building blocks received relatively low funding.ConclusionsThis study shows that a substantial portion of Global Fund's Round 8 funds was devoted to health systems strengthening. Dramatic skewing among the health system building blocks suggests opportunities for more balanced investments with regard to governance, financing, and information system related interventions. There is also a need for agreement, by researchers, recipients, and donors, on keystone interventions that have the greatest system-level impacts for the cost-effective use of funds. Effective health system strengthening depends on inter-agency collaboration and country commitment along with concerted partnership among all the stakeholders working in the health system.

Project description:BackgroundInequities of health outcomes persist in rural populations globally. This is strongly associated with there being less health coverage in rural and underserviced areas. Increasing health care coverage in rural area requires rural health system strengthening, which subsequently necessitates having tools to guide action.ObjectiveThis mapping review aimed to describe the range of tools, frameworks and resources (hereafter called tools) available globally for rural health system capacity building.MethodsThis study collected peer-reviewed materials published in 15-year period (2005-2020). A systematic mapping review process identified 149 articles for inclusion, related to 144 tools that had been developed, implemented, and/or evaluated (some tools reported over multiple articles) which were mapped against the World Health Organization's (WHO's) six health system building blocks (agreed as the elements that need to be addressed to strengthen health systems).ResultsThe majority of tools were from high- and middle-income countries (n = 85, 59% and n = 43, 29%, respectively), and only 17 tools (12%) from low-income countries. Most tools related to the health service building block (n = 57, 39%), or workforce (n = 33, 23%). There were a few tools related to information and leadership and governance (n = 8, 5% each). Very few tools related to infrastructure (n = 3, 2%) and financing (n = 4, 3%). This mapping review also provided broad quality appraisal, showing that the majority of the tools had been evaluated or validated, or both (n = 106, 74%).ConclusionThis mapping review provides evidence that there is a breadth of tools available for health system strengthening globally along with some gaps where no tools were identified for specific health system building blocks. Furthermore, most tools were developed and applied in HIC/MIC and it is important to consider factors that influence their utility in LMIC settings. It may be important to develop new tools related to infrastructure and financing. Tools that have been positively evaluated should be made available to all rural communities, to ensure comprehensive global action on rural health system strengthening.

Project description:BackgroundGlobally, there is renewed interest in and momentum for strengthening community health systems, as also emphasized by the recent Astana Declaration. Recent reviews have identified factors critical to successful community health worker (CHW) programs but pointed to significant evidence gaps. This review aims to propose a global research agenda to strengthen CHW programs.Methods and resultsWe conducted a search for extant systematic reviews on any intermediate factors affecting the effectiveness of CHW programs in February 2018. A total of 30 articles published after year 2000 were included. Data on research gaps were abstracted and summarized under headings based on predominant themes identified in the literature. Following this data gathering phase, two technical advisory groups comprised of experts in the field of community health-including policymakers, implementors, researchers, advocates and donors-were convened to discuss, validate, and prioritize the research gaps identified. Research gap areas that were identified in the literature and validated through expert consultation include selection and training of CHWs, community embeddedness, institutionalization of CHW programs (referrals, supervision, and supply chain), CHW needs including incentives and remuneration, governance and sustainability of CHW programs, performance and quality of care, and cost-effectiveness of CHW programs. Priority research questions included queries on effective policy, financing, governance, supervision and monitoring systems for CHWs and community health systems, implementation questions around the role of digital technologies, CHW preferences, and drivers of CHW motivation and retention over time.ConclusionsAs international interest and investment in CHW programs and community health systems continue to grow, it becomes critical not only to analyze the evidence that exists, but also to clearly define research questions and collect additional evidence to ensure that CHW programs are effective, efficient, equity promoting, and evidence based. Generally, the literature places a strong emphasis on the need for higher quality, more robust research.

Project description:BackgroundDecision-making and strategies to improve service delivery must be supported by reliable health data to generate consistent evidence on health status. The data quality management process must ensure the reliability of collected data. Consequently, various methodologies to improve the quality of services are applied in the health field. At the same time, scientific research is constantly evolving to improve data quality through better reproducibility and empowerment of researchers and offers patient groups tools for secured data sharing and privacy compliance.ObjectiveThrough an integrative literature review, the aim of this work was to identify and evaluate digital health technology interventions designed to support the conducting of health research based on data quality.MethodsA search was conducted in 6 electronic scientific databases in January 2022: PubMed, SCOPUS, Web of Science, Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Digital Library, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature, and Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses checklist and flowchart were used to visualize the search strategy results in the databases.ResultsAfter analyzing and extracting the outcomes of interest, 33 papers were included in the review. The studies covered the period of 2017-2021 and were conducted in 22 countries. Key findings revealed variability and a lack of consensus in assessing data quality domains and metrics. Data quality factors included the research environment, application time, and development steps. Strategies for improving data quality involved using business intelligence models, statistical analyses, data mining techniques, and qualitative approaches.ConclusionsThe main barriers to health data quality are technical, motivational, economical, political, legal, ethical, organizational, human resources, and methodological. The data quality process and techniques, from precollection to gathering, postcollection, and analysis, are critical for the final result of a study or the quality of processes and decision-making in a health care organization. The findings highlight the need for standardized practices and collaborative efforts to enhance data quality in health research. Finally, context guides decisions regarding data quality strategies and techniques.International registered report identifier (irrid)RR2-10.1101/2022.05.31.22275804.

Project description:BackgroundMedicines use related challenges such as inadequate adherence, high levels of antimicrobial resistance and preventable adverse drug reactions have underscored the need to incorporate pharmaceutical services to help achieve desired treatment outcomes, and protect patients from inappropriate use of medicines. This situation is further constrained by insufficient numbers of pharmaceutical personnel and inappropriate skill mix. Studies have addressed individual capacity building approaches of logistics, supply chain or disease specific interventions but few have documented those involving such pharmacy assistants/professionals, or health workers/professionals charged with improving access and provision of pharmaceutical services. We examined how different training modalities have been employed and adapted to meet country-specific context and needs by a global pharmaceutical systems strengthening program in collaboration with a country's Ministry of Health and local stakeholders.MethodsStructured, content analysis of training approaches from twelve selected countries and a survey among conveniently selected trainees in Bangladesh and Ethiopia.ResultsCase-based learning, practice and feedback, and repetitive interventions such as post-training action plan, supportive supervision and mentoring approaches are effective, evidence-based training techniques. In Ethiopia and Bangladesh, over 94% of respondents indicated that they have improved or developed skills or competencies as a result of the program's training activities. Supportive supervision structures and mentorship have been institutionalized with appropriate management structures. National authorities have been sensitized to secure funding from domestic resources or from the global fund grants for post-training follow-up initiatives. The Pharmaceutical Leadership Development Program is an effective, case-based training modality that motivates staff to develop quality-improvement interventions and solve specific challenges. Peer-to-peer learning mechanisms than traditional didactic methods was a preferred intervention among high level government officials both within country and between countries.ConclusionInterventions must involve local institutions in the design and delivery of content for both pre-service and in-service training as well as web-based methods where feasible. Such efforts would meet the changing demand in the pharmaceutical system, and promote the ownership of the human capacity development interventions. The cost-effective partnership with universities demonstrate that competency based pre-service training will prepare the future pharmaceutical workforce with a critical foundation of knowledge and skills required to meet the growing demand for patient-centered pharmaceutical services in resource-constrained countries.

Project description:Background: Development assistance for health (DAH) is an important mechanism for funding and technical support to low-income countries. Despite increased DAH spending, intractable health challenges remain. Recent decades have seen numerous efforts to reform DAH models, yet pernicious challenges persist amidst structural complexities and a growing number of actors. Systems-based approaches are promising for understanding these types of complex adaptive systems. This paper presents a systems-based understanding of DAH, including barriers to achieving sustainable and effective country-driven models for technical assistance and capacity strengthening to achieve better outcomes Methods: We applied an innovative systems-based approach to explore and map how donor structures, processes, and norms pose challenges to improving development assistance models. The system mapping was carried out through an iterative co-creation process including a series of discussions and workshops with diverse stakeholders across 13 countries. Results: Nine systemic challenges emerged: 1) reliance on external implementing partners undermines national capacity; 2) prioritizing global initiatives undercuts local programming; 3) inadequate contextualization hampers program sustainability; 4) decision-maker blind spots inhibit capacity to address inequities; 5) power asymmetries undermine local decision making; 6) donor funding structures pose limitations downstream; 7) program fragmentation impedes long-term country planning; 8) reliance on incomplete data perpetuates inequities; and 9) overemphasis on donor-prioritized data perpetuates fragmentation. Conclusions: These interconnected challenges illustrate interdependencies and feedback loops manifesting throughout the system. A particular driving force across these system barriers is the influence of power asymmetries between actors. The articulation of these challenges can help stakeholders overcome biases about the efficacy of the system and their role in perpetuating the issues. These findings indicate that change is needed not only in how we design and implement global health programs, but in how system actors interact. This requires co-creating solutions that shift the structures, norms, and mindsets governing DAH models.

Project description:IntroductionHealth systems worldwide face the challenge of increasing population health with high-quality care and reducing health care expenditure growth. In pursuit for a solution, regional cross-sectoral partnerships aim to reorganize and integrate services across public health, health care and social care. Although the complexity of regional partnerships demands an incremental strategy, it is yet not known how learning works within these partnerships. To understand learning in regional cross-sectoral partnerships for health, this study aims to map the concept Learning Health System (LHS).MethodsThis mapping review used a qualitative text analysis approach. A literature search was conducted in Embase and was limited to English-language papers published in the period 2015-2020. Title-abstract screening was performed using established exclusion criteria. During full-text screening, we combined deductive and inductive coding. The concept LHS was disentangled into aims, design elements, and process of learning. Data extraction and analysis were performed in MAX QDA 2020.ResultsIn total, 155 articles were included. All articles used the LHS definition of the Institute of Medicine. The interpretation of the concept LHS varied widely. The description of LHS contained 25 highly connected aims. In addition, we identified nine design elements. Most elements were described similarly, only the interpretation of stakeholders, data infrastructure and data varied. Furthermore, we identified three types of learning: learning as 1) interaction between clinical practice and research; 2) a circular process of converting routine care data to knowledge, knowledge to performance; and performance to data; and 3) recurrent interaction between stakeholders to identify opportunities for change, to reveal underlying values, and to evaluate processes. Typology 3 was underrepresented, and the three types of learning rarely occurred simultaneously.ConclusionTo understand learning within regional cross-sectoral partnerships for health, we suggest to specify LHS-aim(s), operationalize design elements, and choose deliberately appropriate learning type(s).

Project description:BackgroundThe shift in the global burden of disease from communicable to noncommunicable was a factor in mobilizing support for a broader post-Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) health agenda. To curb these and other global health problems, 193 Member States of the United Nations (UN) became signatories of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and committed to achieving universal health coverage (UHC) by 2030. In the context of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, the importance of health systems governance (HSG) is felt now more than ever for addressing the pandemic and continuing to provide essential health services. However, little is known about the successes and challenges of HSG with respect to UHC and health security. This study, therefore, aims to synthesize the evidence and identify successes and challenges of HSG towards UHC and health security.MethodsWe conducted a structured narrative review of studies published through 28 July 2021. We searched the existing literature using three databases: PubMed, Scopus and Web of Science. Search terms included three themes: HSG, UHC and health security. We synthesized the findings using the five core functions of HSG: policy formulation and strategic plans; intelligence; regulation; collaboration and coalition; and accountability.ResultsA total of 58 articles were included in the final review. We identified that context-specific health policy and health financing modalities helped to speed up the progress towards UHC and health security. Robust health intelligence, intersectoral collaboration and coalition were also essential to combat the pandemic and ensure the delivery of essential health services. On the contrary, execution of a one-size-fits-all HSG approach, lack of healthcare funding, corruption, inadequate health workforce, and weak regulatory and health government policies were major challenges to achieving UHC and health security.ConclusionsCountries, individually and collectively, need strong HSG to speed up the progress towards UHC and health security. Decentralization of health services to grass root levels, support of stakeholders, fair contribution and distribution of resources are essential to support the implementation of programmes towards UHC and health security. It is also vital to ensure independent regulatory accreditation of organizations in the health system and to integrate quality- and equity-related health service indicators into the national social protection monitoring and evaluation system; these will speed up the progress towards UHC and health security.