Dataset Information

Implementation science protocol for a participatory, theory-informed implementation research programme in the context of health system strengthening in sub-Saharan Africa (ASSET-ImplementER).

ABSTRACT:

Objectives

ASSET (Health System Strengthening in sub-Saharan Africa) is a health system strengthening (HSS) programme involving eight work-packages (ie, a research study that addresses a specific need for HSS) that aims to develop solutions that support high-quality care. Here we present the protocol for the implementation science (IS) theme within ASSET (ASSET-ImplmentER) that aims to understand what HSS interventions work, for whom and how, and how IS methodologies can be adapted to improve the HSS interventions within resource-poor contexts.

Settings

Publicly funded health facilities in rural and urban areas in in Ethiopia, South Africa, Sierra Leone, and Zimbabwe.

Participants

Research staff including principal investigators, coinvestigators, field staff, PhD students, and research assistants.

Interventions

Work-packages use a mixed-methods effectiveness-effectiveness hybrid designs. At the end of the pre-implementation phase, a workshop is held whereby the IS theme, jointly with ASSET work-packages apply IS determinant frameworks to research findings to identify factors that influence the effectiveness of delivering evidence-informed care. Determinants are used to select a set of HSS interventions for further evaluation, where work-packages also theorise selective mechanisms.In the piloting and rolling implementation phase, work-packages pilot the HSS interventions. An iterative process then begins involving evaluation, reflection and adaptation. Throughout this phase, IS determinant frameworks are applied to monitor and identify barriers/enablers to implementation. Selective mechanisms of action are also investigated. Implementation outcomes are evaluated using qualitative and quantitative methods. The psychometric properties of outcome measures including acceptability, appropriateness and feasibility are also evaluated. In a final workshop, work-packages come together, to reflect and explore the utility of the selected IS methods and provide suggestions for future use.Structured templates are used to organise and analyse common and heterogeneous patterns across work-packages. Qualitative data are analysed using thematic analysis and quantitative data are analysed using means and proportions.

Conclusions

We use a novel combination of IS methods at a programmatic level to facilitate comparisons of determinants and mechanisms that influence the effectiveness of HSS interventions in achieving implementation outcomes across different contexts. The study also contributes conceptual development and clarification at the underdeveloped interface of IS, HSS and global health.The ASSET-ImplementER theme is considered minimal risk as we only interview researchers involved in the different work-packages. To this effect we have received approval from King's College London Ethics Committee for research that is considered minimal risk (Reference number: MRA-20/21-21772).

SUBMITTER: Seward N

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8268893 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:To achieve universal health coverage, health system strengthening (HSS) is required to support the of delivery of high-quality care. The aim of the National Institute for Health Research Global Research Unit on HeAlth System StrEngThening in Sub-Saharan Africa (ASSET) is to address this need in a four-year programme, with three healthcare platforms involving eight work-packages. Key to effective health system strengthening (HSS) is the pre-implementation phase of research where efforts focus on applying participatory methods to embed the research programme within the existing health system. To conceptualise the approach, we provide an overview of the key methods applied across work-package to address this important phase of research conducted between 2017 and 2021.Work-packages are being undertaken in publicly funded health systems in rural and urban areas in Ethiopia, Sierra Leone, South Africa, and Zimbabwe. Stakeholders including patients and their caregivers, community representatives, clinicians, managers, administrators, and policymakers are the main research participants.In each work-package, initial activities engage stakeholders and build relationships to ensure co-production and ownership of HSSIs. A mixed-methods approach is then applied to understand and address determinants of high-quality care delivery. Methods such as situation analysis, cross-sectional surveys, interviews and focus group discussions are adopted to each work-package aim and context. At the end of the pre-implementation phase, findings are disseminated using focus group discussions and participatory Theory of Change workshops where stakeholders from each work package use findings to select HSSIs and develop a programme theory.ASSET places a strong emphasis of the pre-implementation phase in order to provide an in-depth and systematic diagnosis of the existing heath system functioning, needs for strengthening and stakeholder engagement. This common approach will inform the design and evaluation of the HSSIs to increase effectiveness across work packages and contexts, to better understand what works, for whom, and how.

Project description:BackgroundDepression leads to poor health outcomes in patients with coronary heart disease (CHD). Despite guidelines recommending screening and treatment of depressed patients with CHD, few patients receive optimal care. We applied behavioral and implementation science methods to (1) identify generalizable, multilevel barriers to depression screening and treatment in patients with CHD and (2) develop a theory-informed, multilevel implementation strategy for promoting guideline adoption.MethodsWe conducted a narrative review of barriers to depression screening and treatment in patients with CHD (ie, medications, exercise, cardiac rehabilitation, or therapy) comprising data from 748 study participants. Informed by the behavior change wheel framework and Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change, we defined multilevel target behaviors, characterized determinants (capability, opportunity, motivation), and mapped barriers to feasible, acceptable, and equitable intervention functions and behavior change techniques to develop a multilevel implementation strategy, targeting health care systems/providers and patients.ResultsWe identified implementation barriers at the system/provider level (eg, Capability: knowledge; Opportunity: workflow integration; Motivation: ownership) and patient level (eg, Capability: knowledge; Opportunity: mobility; Motivation: symptom denial). Acceptable, feasible, and equitable intervention functions included education, persuasion, environmental restructuring, and enablement. Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change strategies included learning collaborative, audit, feedback, and educational materials. The final multicomponent strategy (iHeart DepCare) for promoting depression screening/treatment included problem-solving meetings with clinic staff (system); educational/motivational videos, electronic health record reminders/decisional support (provider); and a shared decision-making (electronic shared decision-making) tool with several functions for patients, for example, patient activation, patient treatment selection support.ConclusionsWe applied implementation and behavioral science methods to identify implementation barriers and to develop a multilevel implementation strategy for increasing uptake of depression screening and treatment in patients with CHD as a use case. The multilevel implementation strategy will be evaluated in a future hybrid II effectiveness-implementation trial.

Project description:IntroductionThe Enhanced Recovery After Surgery programme (ERAS) is an approach to the perioperative care of patients encompassing multiple interventions and involving a wide range of different actors. It can thus be defined as a complex intervention. Despite the strength of the evidence-base in its support, the implementation of ERAS has been slow. This paper specifically explores the utility of Normalization Process Theory (NPT) as a methodological framework to aid exploration of ERAS implementation, with a focus on the core NPT construct coherence.Methods and materialsThe study employed qualitative methods guided by NPT. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with twenty-six healthcare professionals working in three specialities (thoracic, colorectal, head and neck) in a UK hospital. Data were analysed using an adapted Framework Approach.ResultsCoherence, or sense-making work, was key to successful implementation and demonstrated in the importance of participants believing in ERAS both as an individual and as a team. In order to invest in ERAS individuals needed to be able to differentiate its practices favourably with those enacted pre-implementation (differentiation). Participants also needed to understand their specific tasks and responsibilities (individual specification) and build a shared understanding (communal specification), resolving differences in planning meetings. Belief in the worth of ERAS was often aligned to evidence for its effectiveness or benefit to patients (internalization), so implementing ERAS therefore 'made sense'. Sense-making work had strong links with aspects of implementation related to other NPT constructs including resource issues such as funding for data collection and feedback (reflexive monitoring: systemization) and failure to replace key staff members (collective action: skill set workability).ConclusionsNPT was found to be a valuable heuristic device to employ in the exploration of ERAS implementation processes. NPT was useful in facilitating recognition of the importance of coherence work to successful implementation. However despite participants' strong beliefs in the worth of ERAS, it was in translating these beliefs into action that barriers were encountered, highlighting the interconnectedness of NPT constructs and the complicated nature of implementing complex interventions.

Project description:BackgroundLimited research capacity has contributed to the lack of high-quality research from low-and middle-income countries. This is compounded by limited research training opportunities. Research capacity scale-up training was deployed as part of the implementation of the National Surgical, Obstetrics, Anaesthesia, and Nursing Plan for Nigeria. We report the impact of this locally contextualized efforts to scale up research capacity in sub-Saharan Africa.MethodsThis is an evaluation of the training of 65 participants in research, grant writing and manuscript writing and publication. Pre- and post-training surveys using a 5-point Likert scale and open-ended questions were administered to evaluate the impact of the programme.ResultsThere were 39 (60%) males and 26 (40%) females aged 26-62 years (median 42 years). Thirty-nine (60%) participants had previous training in research, but only 12 (18.5%) had previously received grant writing training, and 17 (26.2%) had previously received manuscript writing and publishing training. Following training, 45 (70.3%) participants agreed that the training was relevant. The research, grant writing and manuscript writing, and publication components of the training were rated high by the participants (45-59, 70.3-92.2%). However, 41.2% felt that there was not enough time, and 32.4% felt that the training was too comprehensive. Nearly all the participants agreed that the training had improved their skills in research, grant writing and manuscript writing and publication, and more than two-thirds subsequently engaged in informal mentoring of others. Overall, participants achieved success in designing their own research projects and publishing manuscripts and grants. Three (4.6%) of the participants had gone on to become faculty for the research training programme. The three top barriers encountered following training were time constraints (67.3%), lack of funding (36.5%) and not being able to find research collaborators (25%).ConclusionOutcome of this training programme is encouraging and highlights the feasibility and potential impact of deploying such programmes in low and middle income countries (LMICs). Despite the positive outcomes, barriers including time constraints, funding limitations, and difficulties in finding research collaborators remain to be addressed. Such training programmes need to be supported to strengthen the research capacity in this and similar settings.

Project description:ContextBiobanks are important resources which enable large-scale genomic research with human samples and data, raising significant ethical concerns about how participants' information is managed and shared. Three previous studies of the Canadian public's opinion about these topics have been conducted. Building on those results, an online survey representing the first study of public perceptions about biobanking spanning all Canadian provinces was conducted. Specifically, this study examined qualitative views about biobank objectives, governance structure, control and ownership of samples and data, benefit sharing, consent practices and data sharing norms, as well as additional questions and ethical concerns expressed by the public.ResultsOver half the respondents preferred to give a one-time general consent for the future sharing of their samples among researchers. Most expressed willingness for their data to be shared with the international scientific community rather than used by one or more Canadian institutions. Whereas more respondents indicated a preference for one-time general consent than any other model of consent, they constituted less than half of the total responses, revealing a lack of consensus among survey respondents regarding this question. Respondents identified biobank objectives, governance structure and accountability as the most important information to provide participants. Respondents' concerns about biobanking generally centred around the control and ownership of biological samples and data, especially with respect to potential misuse by insurers, the government and other third parties. Although almost half the respondents suggested that these should be managed by the researchers' institutions, results indicate that the public is interested in being well-informed about these projects and suggest the importance of increased involvement from participants. In conclusion, the study discusses the viability of several proposed models for informed consent, including e-governance, independent trustees and the use of exclusion clauses, in the context of these new findings about the views of the Canadian public.