Recommendations for Effective Intersectoral Collaboration in Health Promotion Interventions: Results from Joint Action CHRODIS-PLUS Work Package 5 Activities.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: van Dale D
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7557573 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Sep
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Recommendations for Effective Intersectoral Collaboration in Health Promotion Interventions: Results from Joint Action CHRODIS-PLUS Work Package 5 Activities.
van Dale Djoeke D Lemmens Lidwien L Hendriksen Marieke M Savolainen Nella N Nagy Péter P Marosi Edit E Eigenmann Michela M Stegemann Ingrid I Rogers Heather L HL
International journal of environmental research and public health 20200905 18
The burden of chronic disease in Europe continues to grow. A major challenge facing national governments is how to tackle the risk factors of sedentary lifestyle, alcohol abuse, smoking, and unhealthy diet. These factors are complex and necessitate intersectoral collaboration to strengthen health promotion, counter-act the social determinants of health, and reduce the prevalence of chronic disease. European countries have diverse intersectoral collaboration to encourage health promotion activiti ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundAction on the social determinants of health is considered a necessary approach to improving health equity. Most of the social determinants of health lie outside the sphere of the health sector and thus collaboration with governmental and non-governmental sectors outside of health are required to develop policies and programs to improve health equity. Case studies of intersectoral action are available, however there is limited information about the impact of intersectoral action on the social determinants of health and health equity.MethodsSearch and retrieval of literature published between 2001 and 2011 was conducted in 6 databases. A staged screening of titles and abstracts, and later full-text, was conducted by two independent reviewers. Reviewers independently assessed the quality of the articles deemed relevant for inclusion. Data were extracted and synthesized in narrative format for all included studies, conducted by one reviewer and checked by another.Results17 articles of varied methodological quality met the inclusion criteria. One systematic review investigating partnership interventions found mixed and limited impacts on health outcomes. Primary studies evaluating the impact of upstream and midstream interventions showed mixed effects. Downstream interventions were generally moderately effective in increasing the availability and use of services by marginalized communities.ConclusionsThe literature evaluating the impact of intersectoral action on health equity is limited. The included studies identified reveal a moderate to no effect on the social determinants of health. The evidence on the impact of intersectoral action on health equity is even more limited. The lack of evidence should not be interpreted as a lack of effect. Rigorous evaluations of intersectoral action are needed to strengthen the evidence base of this public health practice.
| S-EPMC3830502 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundAs population health and well-being are influenced by multiple factors that cut across sectoral boundaries, an intersectoral approach that acknowledges and leverages the multiple determinants, actors and sectors at play is increasingly seen as critical for achieving meaningful and lasting improvements. In this study, we utilize social network analysis (SNA) to characterize the intersectoral collaboration between the organizations working on maternal & child health (MCH) and water & sanitation (WASH) before and immediately after the implementation of HCL Foundation (HCLF)-funded HCL Samuday Project (2015-2017) in a rural block of Uttar Pradesh state, India. While SNA has been used to examine public health issues, few have used it monitor stakeholder relationships, intervene, improve and facilitate project implementation involving intersectoral partnerships, particularly in the context of a low-and middle-income countries.MethodAn organization-level SNA was conducted with 31 key informants from 24 organizations working on MCH and/or WASH in Kachhauna, Uttar Pradesh, India. Data were collected using face-to-face, semi-structured interviews between June and September 2017. Density, centrality and homophily were calculated to describe the network and a qualitative analysis was also conducted to identify the strengths and weaknesses of collaboration between organizations working on MCH and WASH.ResultsOverall, our findings showed that the network of organizations working on MCH and WASH in Kachhauna grew in number since the implementation of Samuday. HCLF rapidly achieved centrality, thus positioning the organization to serve as a gatekeeper of information and enabling it to play a coordinator role within the network. Direct collaboration between other organizations working on MCH and WASH was low at both time points. Interviews with key informants indicated widespread interest in increasing interorganizational interactions and engagement throughout the network.ConclusionThis study demonstrates the feasibility and practical application of SNA for projects like Samuday that involve intersectoral collaboration. It also provides lessons about the use of SNA with organizations as the unit of analysis and in the context of rural India, including challenges, practical considerations, and limitations.
| S-EPMC6636742 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundAddressing the social and other non-biological determinants of health largely depends on policies and programmes implemented outside the health sector. While there is growing evidence on the effectiveness of interventions that tackle these upstream determinants, the health sector does not typically prioritise them. From a health perspective, they may not be cost-effective because their non-health outcomes tend to be ignored. Non-health sectors may, in turn, undervalue interventions with important co-benefits for population health, given their focus on their own sectoral objectives. The societal value of win-win interventions with impacts on multiple development goals may, therefore, be under-valued and under-resourced, as a result of siloed resource allocation mechanisms. Pooling budgets across sectors could ensure the total multi-sectoral value of these interventions is captured, and sectors' shared goals are achieved more efficiently. Under such a co-financing approach, the cost of interventions with multi-sectoral outcomes would be shared by benefiting sectors, stimulating mutually beneficial cross-sectoral investments. Leveraging funding in other sectors could off-set flat-lining global development assistance for health and optimise public spending. Although there have been experiments with such cross-sectoral co-financing in several settings, there has been limited analysis to examine these models, their performance and their institutional feasibility.AimThis study aimed to identify and characterise cross-sectoral co-financing models, their operational modalities, effectiveness, and institutional enablers and barriers.MethodsWe conducted a systematic review of peer-reviewed and grey literature, following PRISMA guidelines. Studies were included if data was provided on interventions funded across two or more sectors, or multiple budgets. Extracted data were categorised and qualitatively coded.ResultsOf 2751 publications screened, 81 cases of co-financing were identified. Most were from high-income countries (93%), but six innovative models were found in Uganda, Brazil, El Salvador, Mozambique, Zambia, and Kenya that also included non-public and international payers. The highest number of cases involved the health (93%), social care (64%) and education (22%) sectors. Co-financing models were most often implemented with the intention of integrating services across sectors for defined target populations, although models were also found aimed at health promotion activities outside the health sector and cross-sectoral financial rewards. Interventions were either implemented and governed by a single sector or delivered in an integrated manner with cross-sectoral accountability. Resource constraints and political relevance emerged as key enablers of co-financing, while lack of clarity around the roles of different sectoral players and the objectives of the pooling were found to be barriers to success. Although rigorous impact or economic evaluations were scarce, positive process measures were frequently reported with some evidence suggesting co-financing contributed to improved outcomes.ConclusionCo-financing remains in an exploratory phase, with diverse models having been implemented across sectors and settings. By incentivising intersectoral action on structural inequities and barriers to health interventions, such a novel financing mechanism could contribute to more effective engagement of non-health sectors; to efficiency gains in the financing of universal health coverage; and to simultaneously achieving health and other well-being related sustainable development goals.
| S-EPMC6918645 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundOne Health is a collaborative, multisectoral, and transdisciplinary approach-working at the local, regional, national, and global levels-with the goal of achieving optimal health outcomes recognizing the interconnection between people, animals, plants, and their shared environment. Operationalization of the One Health approach is still unclear for various local health systems with their respective targets. In this scenario, the empirical study of intersectoral collaboration between the human and animal health systems provides an opportunity to investigate the appropriate strategies and their enabling factors at the local health system level. Thus, this study documented and validated the innovative strategy for intersectoral collaboration, focusing on effectual prevention and control of zoonotic diseases with its enabling factors for a city in western India, Ahmedabad.MethodsThis case study was conducted in three phases: phase I (qualitative data collection, i.e., vignette interview), phase II (quantitative data collection through modified policy Delphi), and phase III (participatory workshop). The vignette data were handled for content analysis, and the Delphi data, like other quantitative data, for descriptive statistics. The participatory workshop adapts the computerized Sensitivity Model® developed by Vester to analyse the health system dynamics.ResultOut of the possible 36 strategies, this study validated the top 15 essential (must-have) and five preferred (should-have) strategies for the study area. For operationalization of the One Health approach, the enabling factors that were identified through the systems approach are micro-level factors at the individual level (trust, leadership, motivation, knowledge), meso-level factors at the organizational level (human resource, capacity-building, shared vision, decision-making capacity, laboratory capacity, surveillance), macro-level factors at the system level (coordinated roles, relationships, common platform), and external factors outside of the system (guidelines/policies, community participation, a specific budget, political will, smart technology).DiscussionThis study reveals that the micro-level factors at the individual level are potential levers of the health system. More attention to these factors could be beneficial for the operationalization of the One Health approach. This study recommends a systems approach through a bottom-up exploration to understand the local health system and its enabling factors, which should be accounted for in formulating future One Health policies.
| S-EPMC8097865 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Synchronized movement is a ubiquitous feature of dance and music performance. Much research into the evolutionary origins of these cultural practices has focused on why humans perform rather than watch or listen to dance and music. In this study, we show that movement synchrony among a group of performers predicts the aesthetic appreciation of live dance performances. We developed a choreography that continuously manipulated group synchronization using a defined movement vocabulary based on arm swinging, walking and running. The choreography was performed live to four audiences, as we continuously tracked the performers' movements, and the spectators' affective responses. We computed dynamic synchrony among performers using cross recurrence analysis of data from wrist accelerometers, and implicit measures of arousal from spectators' heart rates. Additionally, a subset of spectators provided continuous ratings of enjoyment and perceived synchrony using tablet computers. Granger causality analyses demonstrate predictive relationships between synchrony, enjoyment ratings and spectator arousal, if audiences form a collectively consistent positive or negative aesthetic evaluation. Controlling for the influence of overall movement acceleration and visual change, we show that dance communicates group coordination via coupled movement dynamics among a group of performers. Our findings are in line with an evolutionary function of dance-and perhaps all performing arts-in transmitting social signals between groups of people. Human movement is the common denominator of dance, music and theatre. Acknowledging the time-sensitive and immediate nature of the performer-spectator relationship, our study makes a significant step towards an aesthetics of joint actions in the performing arts.
| S-EPMC5526561 | biostudies-literature
Project description:In public health today, there is a widespread call for intersectoral action (ISA) programs, in which two or more sectors cooperate to address a problem. This trend raises a question of how to appropriately assess the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of ISA programs. To assess the impact of ISA, evaluation methods should provide a framework for simultaneously considering the impact of two or more interventions when selecting from a portfolio of programs. There is a gap in literature on such methods. In this research note, from a narrative review, we report and describe methods that could be useful for evaluating ISA programs. Subsequently, we present a hypothetical case study to demonstrate the use of these methods.We identified four methods that have potential to assess the joint impact of multiple interventions: economic evaluation, portfolio analysis, multiple-criteria decision analysis, and programme budgeting and marginal analysis. To keep pace with the desire to use strong evidence to inform the selection and design of ISA programs, methods must evolve to support these initiatives. This research note seeks to begin a dialogue on existing decision methods which may be used to assist decision makers with funding and resource allocation decisions of ISA programs.
| S-EPMC6062875 | biostudies-other
Project description:IntroductionAs the major cause of premature death worldwide, noncommunicable diseases (NCDs) are complex and multidimensional, prevention and control of which need global, national, local, and multisectoral collaboration. Governmental stakeholder analysis and social network analysis (SNA) are among the recognized techniques to understand and improve collaboration. Through stakeholder analysis, social network analysis, and identifying the leverage points, we investigated the intersectoral collaboration (ISC) in preventing and controlling NCDs-related risk factors in Iran.MethodsThis is a mixed-methods study based on semi-structured interviews and reviewing of the legal documents and acts to identify and assess the interest, position, and power of collective decision-making centers on NCDs, followed by the social network analysis of related councils and the risk factors of NCDs. We used Gephi software version 0.9.2 to facilitate SNA. We determined the supreme councils' interest, position, power, and influence on NCDs and related risk factors. The Intervention Level Framework (ILF) and expert opinion were utilized to identify interventions to enhance inter-sectoral collaboration.ResultsWe identified 113 national collective decision-making centers. Five councils had the highest evaluation score for the four criteria (Interest, Position, Power, and Influence), including the Supreme Council for Health and Food Security (SCHFS), Supreme Council for Standards (SCS), Supreme Council for Environmental Protection (SCIP), Supreme Council for Health Insurance (SCHI) and Supreme Council of the Centers of Excellence for Medical Sciences. We calculated degree, in degree, out-degree, weighted out-degree, closeness centrality, betweenness centrality, and Eigenvector centrality for all councils. Supreme Council for Standards and SCHFS have the highest betweenness centrality, showing Node's higher importance in information flow. Interventions to facilitate inter-sectoral collaboration were identified and reported based on Intervention Level Framework's five levels (ILF).ConclusionA variety of stakeholders influences the risk factors of non-communicable diseases. Through an investigation of stakeholders and their social networks, we determined the primary actors for each risk factor. Through the different (levels and types) of interventions identified in this study, the MoHME can leverage the ability of identified stakeholders to improve risk factors management. The proposed interventions for identified stakeholders could facilitate intersectoral collaboration, which is critical for more effective prevention and control of modifiable risk factors for NCDs in Iran. Supreme councils and their members could serve as key hubs for implementing targeted inter-sectoral approaches to address NCDs' risk factors.
| S-EPMC9439719 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundIntersectoral collaboration is critical to the successful implementation of many public health interventions (PHIs). Little attention has been paid to whether and how processes at the stage of evaluation can promote intersectoral collaboration. The objective of this study was to examine European experiences and views on whether and how the evaluation of PHIs promote intersectoral collaboration.MethodsA qualitative study design was used. We conducted semi-structured interviews with 15 individuals centrally involved in the evaluation of PHIs in 6 European countries (Austria, Denmark, England, Germany, Norway, and Switzerland). Questions pertained to current processes for evaluating PHIs in the country and current and potential strategies for promoting intersectoral collaboration. Transcripts were analyzed using thematic analysis to identify key themes responding to our primary objective.ResultsExperiences with promoting intersectoral collaboration through the evaluation of PHIs could be summarized in 4 themes: (1) Early involvement of non-health sectors in the evaluative process and inclusion of non-health benefits can promote intersectoral collaboration, but should be combined with greater influence of these sectors in shaping PHIs; (2) Harmonization of methodological approaches may enable comparison of results and facilitate intersectoral collaboration, but should not be an overriding goal; (3) Involvement in health impact assessments (HIAs) can promote intersectoral collaboration, but needs to be incentivized and be conducted without putting overwhelming demands on non-health sectors; (4) A designated body for evaluating PHIs may promote intersectoral collaboration, but its design needs to take account of realities of policy-making.ConclusionThe full potential for promoting intersectoral collaboration through the evaluation of PHIs appears currently unrealized in the settings we studied. To further promote intersectoral collaboration, evaluators and decision-makers may consider the full range of strategies characterized in this study. This may be most effective if the strategies are deployed so that they reinforce each other, value outcomes beyond health, and are tailored to maximize political priority for PHIs across sectors.
| S-EPMC7947666 | biostudies-literature
Project description:As a group, newly arrived migrants in Sweden face inequities in health compared to the general population. Successful promotion of population health requires awareness of and focus on health from several sectors of society. In light of this, the aim was to study the views of local authority officials on collaboration in health promotion activities for newly arrived migrants. Data was collected through five focus group interviews with 23 local authority officials working with the integration of newly arrived migrants in the Establishment Program in a municipality or at the Employment Services in northern Sweden. An inductive qualitative latent content analysis was performed, and the analysis showed that the participating officials considered health promotion as desirable in the Establishment Program, but it also raised complex issues within the existing organisations. The officials described unclear roles, but also possible changes to the organisation that would improve the possibility of working to promote health. The present study adds to the relatively limited knowledge of health promotion in integration activities and offers clinical relevance for policymakers through the officials' suggestions for improvements in the Establishment Program. It also raises important questions for further research.
| S-EPMC7259499 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundCollaborations are important to health promotion in addressing multi-party problems. Interest in collaborative processes in health promotion is rising, but still lacks monitoring instruments. The authors developed the DIagnosis of Sustainable Collaboration (DISC) model to enable comprehensive monitoring of public health collaboratives. The model focuses on opportunities and impediments for collaborative change, based on evidence from interorganizational collaboration, organizational behavior and planned organizational change. To illustrate and assess the DISC-model, the 2003/2004 application of the model to the Dutch whole-school health promotion collaboration is described.MethodsThe study combined quantitative research, using a cross-sectional survey, with qualitative research using the personal interview methodology and document analysis. A DISC-based survey was sent to 55 stakeholders in whole-school health promotion in one Dutch region. The survey consisted of 22 scales with 3 to 8 items. Only scales with a reliability score of 0.60 were accepted. The analysis provided for comparisons between stakeholders from education, public service and public health.The survey was followed by approaching 14 stakeholders for a semi-structured DISC-based interview. As the interviews were timed after the survey, the interviews were used to clarify unexpected and unclear outcomes of the survey as well.Additionally, a DISC-based document analysis was conducted including minutes of meetings, project descriptions and correspondence with schools and municipalities.ResultsResponse of the survey was 77% and of the interviews 86%. Significant differences between respondents of different domains were found for the following scales: organizational characteristics scale, the change strategies, network development, project management, willingness to commit and innovative actions and adaptations. The interviews provided a more specific picture of the state of the art of the studied collaboration regarding the DISC-constructs.ConclusionThe DISC-model is more than just the sum of the different parameters provided in the literature on interorganizational collaboration, organization change, networking and setting-approaches. Monitoring a collaboration based on the DISC-model yields insight into windows of opportunity and current impediments for collaborative change. DISC-based monitoring is a promising strategy enabling project managers and social entrepreneurs to plan change management strategies systematically.
| S-EPMC2605462 | biostudies-literature