Search

Assessment of applicability is an essential part of the systematic review process. In the context of systematic reviews of the effects of interventions, applicability is an assessment of whether the findings of a review can be applied in a particular context or population. For more complex interventions, assessing applicability can be challenging because of greater diversity of, and interactions within and between, the intended population, intervention components, comparison conditions, and outcomes as well as a range of further considerations related to intervention context and theoretical basis. We recommend that review authors plan and conduct analyses to explain variations in effect and answer questions about mechanisms of action and influence of different settings, contexts, and populations. We also recommend that review authors provide rich descriptions of the setting, implementation details, resource use, and contexts of included studies and assess applicability for at least one target population, setting, and context. This should facilitate applicability assessments by end users. Consensus on terminology is needed and guidance should be developed for the synthesis of implementation information within reviews as well as the documentation of applicability judgments by review authors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: to synthesise qualitative research on task-shifting to and from midwives to identify barriers and facilitators to successful implementation. Design: systematic review of qualitative evidence using a 4-stage narrative synthesis approach. We searched the CINAHL, Medline and the Social Science Citation Index databases. Study quality was assessed and evidence was synthesised using a theory-informed comparative case-study approach. Setting: midwifery services in any setting in low-, middle-, and high-income countries. Participants: midwives, nurses, doctors, patients, community members, policymakers, programme managers, community health workers, doulas, traditional birth attendants and other stakeholders. Interventions: task shifting to and from midwives. Findings: thirty-seven studies were included. Findings were organised under three broad themes: (1) challenges in defining and defending the midwifery model of care during task shifting, (2) training, supervision and support challenges in midwifery task shifting, and (3) teamwork and task shifting. Key conclusions: this is the first review to report implementation factors associated with midwifery task shifting and optimisation. Though task shifting may serve as a powerful means to address the crisis in human resources for maternal and newborn health, it is also a complex intervention that generally requires careful planning, implementation and ongoing supervision and support to ensure optimal and safe impact. The unique character and history of the midwifery model of care often makes these challenges even greater. Implications for practice: evidence from the review fed into the World Health Organisation's 'Recommendations for Optimizing Health Worker Roles to Improve Access to Key Maternal and Newborn Health Interventions through Task Shifting' guideline. It is appropriate to consider task shifting interventions to ensure wider access to safe midwifery care globally. Legal protections and liabilities and the regulatory framework for task shifting should be designed to accommodate new task shifted practices. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Systematic reviews within the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care Group (EPOC) can include both randomized and nonrandomized study designs. We explored how many EPOC reviews consider and identify nonrandomized studies, and whether the proportion of nonrandomized studies identified is linked to the review topic. Study Design and Setting: We recorded the study designs considered in 65 EPOC reviews. For reviews that considered nonrandomized studies, we calculated the proportion of identified studies that were nonrandomized and explored whether there were differences in the proportion of nonrandomized studies according to the review topic. Results: Fifty-one (78.5%) reviews considered nonrandomized studies. Forty-six of these reviews found nonrandomized studies, but the proportion varied a great deal (median, 33%; interquartile range, 25e50%). Reviews of health care delivery interventions had lower proportions of nonrandomized studies than those of financial and governance interventions. Conclusion: Most EPOC reviews consider nonrandomized studies, but the degree to which they find them varies. As nonrandomized studies are believed to be at higher risk of bias and their inclusion entails a considerable effort, review authors should consider whether the benefits justify the inclusion of these designs. Research should explore whether it is more useful to consider nonrandomized studies in reviews of some intervention types than others. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Interprofessional teamwork is widely advocated in health and social care policies. However, the theoretical literature is rarely employed to help understand the nature of collaborative relations in action or to critique normative discourses of teamworking. This paper draws upon theory of impression management, modified by , to explore how professionals ‘present’ themselves when interacting on hospital wards and also how they employ front stage and backstage settings in their collaborative work. The study was undertaken in the general medicine directorate of a large NHS teaching hospital in England. An ethnographic approach was used, including interviews with 49 different health and social care staff and participant observation of ward-based work. These observations focused on both verbal and non-verbal interprofessional interactions. Thematic analysis of the data was undertaken. The study findings suggest that doctor–nurse relationships were characterised by ‘parallel working’, with limited information sharing or effective joint working. Interprofessional working was based less on planned, ‘front stage’ activities, such as wards rounds, than on ad hoc backstage opportunistic strategies. These backstage interactions, including corridor conversations, allowed the appearance of collaborative ‘teamwork’ to be maintained as a form of impression management. These interactions also helped to overcome the limitations of planned front stage work. Our data also highlight the shifting ‘ownership’ of space by different professional groups and the ways in which front and backstage activities are structured by physical space. We argue that the use of Sinclair’s model helps to illuminate the nature of collaborative interprofessional relations within an acute care setting. In such settings, the notion of teamwork, as a form of regular interaction and with a shared team identity, appears to have little relevance. This suggests that interventions to change interprofessional practice need to include a focus on ad hoc as well as planned forms of communication. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: There is re-emerging interest in community health workers (CHWs) as part of wider policies regarding task-shifting within human resources for health. This paper examines the history of CHW programmes established in South Africa in the later apartheid years (1970s–1994) – a time of innovative initiatives. After 1994, the new democratic government embraced primary healthcare (PHC), however CHW initiatives were not included in their health plan and most of these programmes subsequently collapsed. Since then a wide array of disease-focused CHW projects have emerged, particularly within HIV care. Thirteen oral history interviews and eight witness seminars were conducted in South Africa in April 2008 with founders and CHWs from these earlier programmes. These data were triangulated with written primary sources and analysed using thematic content analysis. The study suggests that 1970s–1990s CHW programmes were seen as innovative, responsive, comprehensive and empowering for staff and communities, a focus which respondents felt was lost within current programmes. The growth of these earlier projects was underpinned by the struggle against apartheid. Respondents felt that the more technical focus of current CHW programmes under-utilise a valuable human resource which previously had a much wider social and health impact. These prior experiences and lessons learned could usefully inform policy-making frameworks for CHWs in South Africa today. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Few sociological studies have examined care organisation in primary health settings in low- and middle-income countries. This paper explores the organisation of health care work in primary care clinics in Cape Town, South Africa, by analysing two elements of clinic organisation as rituals. The first is a formal, policy-driven element of care: directly observed therapy for tuberculosis patients. The second is an informal ritual, seemingly separate from the clinical work of the team: morning prayers in the clinic. We draw on data from an ethnography in which seven clinics providing care to people with tuberculosis were theoretically sampled for study. These data include participant observation of clinic sessions, and interviews and group discussions with providers and patients, which were analysed using approaches drawn from grounded theory. Our findings suggest that rather than seeing the ritualised aspects of clinic activities as merely traditional elements of care that potentially interfere with the application of good practice, it is essential to understand their symbolic values if their contribution to health care organisation is to be recognised. While both staff and patients participate in these rituals, these performances do not demonstrate or facilitate cohesion across these groups but rather embody the conflicting values of patients and staff in these clinics. As such, rituals act to reinforce asymmetrical relations of power between different constituencies, and to strengthen conventional modes of provider–patient interaction. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: South Africa is experiencing one of the largest HIV/AIDS epidemics in the world. A national, publicly funded anti-retroviral therapy (ART) programme has recently been launched. This paper describes the findings from a qualitative study of the views of health-care professionals, especially nurses, regarding the ART roll-out in the Free State province of South Africa, where nurses are responsible for most of the care delivered to AIDS patients. The study highlights the hope provided by the new programme and the motivation it has engendered among nurses. Apart from long waiting lists for ART, these professionals saw the main programme challenge as the integration of a holistic model of patient-centred care, inclusive of psycho-social support, into an under-resourced primary health-care system. By comparison, neither the increasing clinical responsibilities borne by nurses, nor the ability of patients to adhere to ART, were seen as key problems. This study suggests that the ART programme has mobilised health workers to assume responsibility for providing high-quality care in an under-resourced setting. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Highlights • The first effort to develop core outcome domain sets for vaccination communication. • Identifying impacts on vaccine hesitancy requires intermediate outcome measurement. • Outcomes should be chosen based on the vaccination communication intervention aim. • Outcomes should reflect the priorities of stakeholders. Abstract Background Communication interventions for childhood vaccination are promising strategies to address vaccine hesitancy, but current research is limited by the outcomes measured. Most studies measure only vaccination-related outcomes, with minimal consideration of vaccine hesitancy-relevant intermediate outcomes. This impedes understanding of which interventions or elements are effective. It is also unknown which outcomes are important to the range of stakeholders affected by vaccine hesitancy. Outcome selection shapes the evidence base, informing future interventions and trials, and should reflect stakeholder priorities. Therefore, our aim was to identify which outcome domains (i.e. broad outcome categories) are most important to different stakeholders, identifying preliminary core outcome domains to inform evaluation of three common vaccination communication types: (i) communication to inform or educate, (ii) remind or recall, and (iii) enhance community ownership. Methods We conducted a two-stage online Delphi survey, involving four stakeholder groups: parents or community members, healthcare providers, researchers, and government or non-governmental organisation representatives. Participants rated the importance of eight outcome domains for each of the three communication types. They also rated specific outcomes within one domain ("attitudes or beliefs") and provided feedback about the survey. Results Collectively, stakeholder groups prioritised outcome domains differently when considering the effects of different communication types. For communication that aims to (i) inform or educate, the most important outcome domain is "knowledge or understanding"; for (ii) reminder communication, "vaccination status and behaviours"; and for (iii) community engagement communication, "community participation". All stakeholder groups rated most outcome domains as very important or critical. The highest rated specific outcome within the "attitudes or beliefs" domain was "trust". Conclusion This Delphi survey expands the field of core outcomes research and identifies preliminary core outcome domains for measuring the effects of communication about childhood vaccination. The findings support the argument that vaccination communication is not a single homogenous intervention – it has a range of purposes, and vaccination communication evaluators should select outcomes accordingly. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: This article outlines a research and development agenda for systematic reviews that ask complex questions about interventions varying in degree and type of complexity. Study Design and Setting: Consensus development by key authors of articles on methodological challenges in systematic reviews of complex interventions, based on a 2-day workshop in Montebello, Canada, January 2012. Results: There is an urgent need for a more precise and consistently applied lexicon and language to disaggregate several conceptually distinct dimensions of ''complexity.'' Selected current evidence synthesis methods have potential application in reviews where complexity is important. There is a lack of evaluation of methods to better understand the nature of complex interventions and the optimal processes of synthesizing and interpreting evidence from these systematic reviews. Gaps in methods, knowledge, and know-how exist, and there is a need for additional guidance. Conclusion: Understanding how complexity can impact on findings of systematic reviews is critical. Experience in applying methods that have been developed to facilitate this understanding is limited, and the degree to which these approaches improve the systematic review process or transparency is only partially understood. Future research should concentrate on the impact of complexity on the systematic review process and findings and on further methodological development. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: The Female Community Health Volunteer (FCHV) Programme in Nepal has existed since the late 1980s and includes almost 50,000 volunteers. Although volunteer programmes are widely thought to be characterised by high attrition levels, the FCHV Programme loses fewer than 5% of its volunteers annually. The degree to which decision makers understand community health worker motivations and match these with appropriate incentives is likely to influence programme sustainability. The purpose of this study was to explore the views of stakeholders who have participated in the design and implementation of the Female Community Health Volunteer regarding Volunteer motivation and appropriate incentives, and to compare these views with the views and expectations of Volunteers. Semi-structured interviews were carried out in 2009 with 19 purposively selected non-Volunteer stakeholders, including policy makers and programme managers. Results were compared with data from previous studies of Female Community Health Volunteers and from interviews with four Volunteers and two Volunteer activists. Stakeholders saw Volunteers as motivated primarily by social respect, religious and moral duty. The freedom to deliver services at their leisure was seen as central to the volunteer concept. While stakeholders also saw the need for extrinsic incentives such as micro-credit, regular wages were regarded not only as financially unfeasible, but as a potential threat to the Volunteers’ social respect, and thereby to their motivation. These views were reflected in interviews with and previous studies of Female Community Health Volunteers, and appear to be influenced by a tradition of volunteering as moral behaviour, a lack of respect for paid government workers, and the Programme’s community embeddedness. Our study suggests that it may not be useful to promote a generic range of incentives, such as wages, to improve community health worker programme sustainability. Instead, programmes should ensure that the context-specific expectations of community health workers, programme managers, and policy makers are in alignment if low attrition and high performance are to be achieved. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]