Search

Chronic conditions are an increasing problem in Low- and Middle-Income Countries (LMICs) yet, the challenges faced by low-income populations with these conditions in such countries are not well understood. Based on in-depth interviews with people affected by chronic conditions and their family members, this paper describes the experience of patients suffering from diabetes or hypertension in rural communities of Mozambique, Nepal, and Peru. We analysed our data using the concepts of disruption and adaptive strategies, finding that despite being very different countries, the implications in daily lives, interpersonal relationships, and family dynamics are similar, and that oftentimes such impact is defined along gender lines. We show that adjustments to living with a chronic disease are not always easy, particularly when they imply changes and reconfiguration of roles and responsibilities for which neither the individual nor their families are prepared. The study adds to the literature on the disruptive effects of chronic conditions and stresses the importance of contextualising disruptive experiences among disadvantaged populations within weak health systems. Our findings highlight the relevance of understanding the challenges of developing adaptive solutions to chronic care in resource-scarce contexts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Engaging diverse stakeholders in developing core outcome sets (COSs) can produce more meaningful metrics as well as research responsive to patient needs. The most common COS prioritisation method, Delphi surveys, has limitations related to selection bias and participant understanding, while qualitative methods like group discussions are less frequently used. This study aims to test a co-creation approach to COS development for type 1 diabetes (T1DM) in Peru., Methods: Using a co-creation approach, we aimed to prioritise outcomes for T1DM management in Peru, incorporating perspectives from people with T1DM, caregivers, healthcare professionals, and decision-makers. A set of outcomes were previously identified through a systematic review and qualitative evidence synthesis. Through qualitative descriptive methods, including in-person workshops, each group of stakeholders contributed to the ranking of outcomes. Decision-makers also discussed the feasibility of measuring these outcomes within the Peruvian healthcare system., Results: While priorities varied among participant groups, all underscored the significance of monitoring healthcare system functionality over mortality. Participants recognized the interconnected nature of healthcare system performance, clinical outcomes, self-management, and quality of life. When combining the rankings from all the groups, metrics related to economic impact on the individual and structural support, policies promoting health, and protecting those living with T1DM were deemed more important in comparison to measuring clinical outcomes., Conclusion: We present the first COS for T1DM focused on low-and-middle-income countries and show aspects of care that are relevant in this setting. Diverse prioritisation among participant groups underscores the need of inclusive decision-making processes. By incorporating varied perspectives, healthcare systems can better address patient needs and enhance overall care quality., (© 2024 The Author(s). The International Journal of Health Planning and Management published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Different methodological approaches for implementation research in global health focusing on how interventions are developed, implemented and evaluated are needed. In this paper, we detail the approach developed and implemented in the COmmunity HEalth System InnovatiON (COHESION) Project, a global health project aimed at strengthening health systems in Mozambique, Nepal and Peru. This project developed innovative formative research at policy, health system and community levels to gain a comprehensive understanding of the barriers, enablers, needs and lessons for the management of chronic disease using non-communicable and neglected tropical diseases as tracer conditions. After formative research, COHESION adopted a co-creation approach in the planning of interventions. The approach included two interactions with each type of stakeholder at policy, health system and community level in each country which aimed to develop interventions to improve the delivery of care of the tracer conditions. Diverse tools and methods were used in order to prioritise interventions based on support, resources and impact. Additionally, a COHESION score that assessed feasibility, sustainability and scaling up was used to select three potential interventions. Next steps for the COHESION Project are to further detail and develop the interventions propositioned through this process. Besides providing some useful tools and methods, this work also highlights the challenges and lessons learned from such an approach., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared.