Barriers and facilitators to the integration of digital technologies in mental health systems: A protocol for a qualitative systematic review.

INTRODUCTION: Digital technology has the potential to improve health outcomes and health system performance in fragmented and under-funded mental health systems. Despite this potential, the integration of digital technology tools into mental health systems has been relatively poor. This is a protocol for a synthesis of qualitative evidence that will aim to determine the barriers and facilitators to integrating digital technologies in mental health systems and classify them in contextual domains at individual, organisational and system levels. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The methodological framework for systematic review of qualitative evidence described in Lockwood et al. will be applied to this review. A draft search strategy was developed in collaboration with an experienced senior health research librarian. A systematic search of Medline, Embase, Scopus, PsycInfo, Web of Science and Google Scholar, as well as hand searching of reference lists and reviews will identify relevant studies for inclusion. Study selection will be carried out independently by two authors, with discrepancies resolved by consensus. The quality of selected studies will be assessed using JBI Critical Appraisal Checklist for Qualitative Research. Data will be charted using JBI QUARI Data Extraction Tool for Qualitative Research. Findings will be defined and classified both deductively in a priori conceptual framework and inductively by a thematic analysis. Results will be reported based on the Enhancing transparency in reporting the synthesis of qualitative research. The level of confidence of the findings will be assessed using GRADE-CERQual. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study does not require ethics approval. The systematic review will inform policy and practices around improving the integration of digital technologies into mental health care systems.

The COVID-19 pandemic in Italy: Policy and technology impact on health and non-health outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Italy was the first Western country to experience a major coronavirus outbreak and consequently faced large-scale health and socio-economic challenges. The Italian government enforced a wide set of homogeneous interventions nationally, despite the differing incidences of the virus throughout the country. OBJECTIVE: The paper aims to analyse the policies implemented by the government and their impact on health and non-health outcomes considering both scaling-up and scaling-down interventions. METHODS: To categorise the policy interventions, we rely on the comparative and conceptual framework developed by Moy et al. (2020). We investigate the impact of policies on the daily reported number of deaths, case fatality rate, confirmation rate, intensive care unit saturation, and financial and job market indicators across the three major geographical areas of Italy (North, Centre, and South). Qualitative and quantitative data are gathered from mixed sources: Italian national and regional institutions, National Health Research and international organisations. Our analysis contributes to the literature on the COVID-19 pandemic by comparing policy interventions and their outcomes. RESULTS: Our findings suggest that the strictness and timing of containment and prevention measures played a prominent role in tackling the pandemic, both from a health and economic perspective. Technological interventions played a marginal role due to the inadequacy of protocols and the delay of their implementation. CONCLUSIONS: Future government interventions should be informed by evidence-based decision making to balance, the benefits arising from the timing and stringency of the interventions against the adverse social and economic cost, both in the short and long term.

COVID-19: The need for an Australian economic pandemic response plan.

OBJECTIVES: Pandemics pressure national governments to respond swiftly. Mitigation efforts created an imbalance between population health, capacity of the healthcare system and economic prosperity. Each pandemic arising from a new virus is unknown territory for policy makers, and there is considerable uncertainty of the appropriateness of responses and outcomes. METHODS: A qualitative approach was used to review mixed sources of data including Australian reports, official government publications, and COVID-19 data to discern robust future responses. Publicly available epidemiological and economic data were utilised to provide insight into the impact of the pandemic on Australia's healthcare system and economy. RESULTS: Policies implemented by the Australian Government to mitigate the spread of COVID-19 impacted the healthcare sector and economy. This paper incorporates lessons learned to inform optimal economic preparedness. The rationale for an economic response plan concomitant with the health pandemic plan is explored to guide Australian Government policy makers in ensuring holistic and robust solutions for future pandemics. CONCLUSIONS: In future, an Australian Economic Pandemic Response Plan will aid in health and economic system preparedness, whilst a strong Australian economy and strategic planning will ensure resilience to future pandemics.