Evaluating implementation of the World Health Organization's Strategic Approach to strengthening sexual and reproductive health policies and programs to address unintended pregnancy and unsafe abortion.

BACKGROUND: We conducted a process evaluation to assess how the World Health Organization's (WHO) Strategic Approach to strengthening sexual and reproductive health policies and programs ("the SA") was used in 15 countries that requested WHO's technical support in addressing unintended pregnancy and unsafe abortion. The SA is a three-stage planning, policy, and program implementation process. We used the social ecological model (SEM) to analyze the contextual factors that influenced SA implementation. METHODS: We used a two-phased sequential approach to data collection and analysis. In Phase A, we conducted a document and literature review and synthesized data thematically. In Phase B, we conducted interviews with stakeholders who used the SA in the countries of interest. We used a qualitative method triangulation technique to analyze and combine data from both phases to understand how the SA was implemented in each country. RESULTS: Data from 145 documents and 19 interviews described the SA process and activities in each country. All 15 countries completed Stage 1 activities. The activities of Stage 1 determined activities in subsequent stages and varied across countries. Following Stage 1, some countries focused on reforming policies to improve access to sexual and reproductive health (SRH) services whereas others focused on improving provider-level capacity to enhance SRH service quality and improving community-level SRH education. We identified factors across SEM levels that affected SA implementation, including individual- and community-level perceptions of using the SA and the recommendations that emerged from its use, organizational capacity to conduct SA activities, and how well these activities aligned with the existing political climate. Stakeholders perceived SA implementation to be country-driven and systematic in bringing attention to important SRH issues in their countries. CONCLUSION: We identified key success factors for influencing the individual, organization, and system change required for implementing the SA. These include sustaining stakeholder engagement for all SA stages, monitoring and reporting on activities, and leveraging activities and outputs from each SA stage to obtain technical and financial support for subsequent stages. Results may be used to optimize ongoing implementation efforts to improve access to and the quality of SRH services.

Implementation of effective practices in health facilities: a systematic review of cluster randomised trials.

BACKGROUND: The capacity for health systems to support the translation of research in to clinical practice may be limited. The cluster randomised controlled trial (cluster RCT) design is often employed in evaluating the effectiveness of implementation of evidence-based practices. We aimed to systematically review available evidence to identify and evaluate the components in the implementation process at the facility level using cluster RCT designs. METHODS: All cluster RCTs where the healthcare facility was the unit of randomisation, published or written from 1990 to 2014, were assessed. Included studies were analysed for the components of implementation interventions employed in each. Through iterative mapping and analysis, we synthesised a master list of components used and summarised the effects of different combinations of interventions on practices. RESULTS: Forty-six studies met the inclusion criteria and covered the specialty groups of obstetrics and gynaecology (n=9), paediatrics and neonatology (n=4), intensive care (n=4), internal medicine (n=20), and anaesthetics and surgery (n=3). Six studies included interventions that were delivered across specialties. Nine components of multifaceted implementation interventions were identified: leadership, barrier identification, tailoring to the context, patient involvement, communication, education, supportive supervision, provision of resources, and audit and feedback. The four main components that were most commonly used were education (n=42, 91%), audit and feedback (n=26, 57%), provision of resources (n=23, 50%) and leadership (n=21, 46%). CONCLUSIONS: Future implementation research should focus on better reporting of multifaceted approaches, incorporating sets of components that facilitate the translation of research into practice, and should employ rigorous monitoring and evaluation.

Barriers, Facilitators and Priorities for Implementation of WHO Maternal and Perinatal Health Guidelines in Four Lower-Income Countries: A GREAT Network Research Activity.

BACKGROUND: Health systems often fail to use evidence in clinical practice. In maternal and perinatal health, the majority of maternal, fetal and newborn mortality is preventable through implementing effective interventions. To meet this challenge, WHO's Department of Reproductive Health and Research partnered with the Knowledge Translation Program at St. Michael's Hospital (SMH), University of Toronto, Canada to establish a collaboration on knowledge translation (KT) in maternal and perinatal health, called the GREAT Network (Guideline-driven, Research priorities, Evidence synthesis, Application of evidence, and Transfer of knowledge). We applied a systematic approach incorporating evidence and theory to identifying barriers and facilitators to implementation of WHO maternal heath recommendations in four lower-income countries and to identifying implementation strategies to address these. METHODS: We conducted a mixed-methods study in Myanmar, Uganda, Tanzania and Ethiopia. In each country, stakeholder surveys, focus group discussions and prioritization exercises were used, involving multiple groups of health system stakeholders (including administrators, policymakers, NGOs, professional associations, frontline healthcare providers and researchers). RESULTS: Despite differences in guideline priorities and contexts, barriers identified across countries were often similar. Health system level factors, including health workforce shortages, and need for strengthened drug and equipment procurement, distribution and management systems, were consistently highlighted as limiting the capacity of providers to deliver high-quality care. Evidence-based health policies to support implementation, and improve the knowledge and skills of healthcare providers were also identified. Stakeholders identified a range of tailored strategies to address local barriers and leverage facilitators. CONCLUSION: This approach to identifying barriers, facilitators and potential strategies for improving implementation proved feasible in these four lower-income country settings. Further evaluation of the impact of implementing these strategies is needed.

Low- and middle-income countries face many common barriers to implementation of maternal health evidence products.

OBJECTIVES: To explore similarities and differences in challenges to maternal health and evidence implementation in general across several low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) and to identify common and unique themes representing barriers to and facilitators of evidence implementation in LMIC health care settings. STUDY DESIGN: Secondary analysis of qualitative data. SETTING: Meeting reports and articles describing projects undertaken by the authors in five LMICs on three continents were analyzed. Projects focused on identifying barriers to and facilitators of implementation of evidence products: five World Health Organization maternal health guidelines, and a knowledge translation strategy to improve adherence to tuberculosis treatment. Data were analyzed using thematic content analysis. RESULTS: Among identified barriers to evidence implementation, a high degree of commonality was found across countries and clinical areas, with lack of financial, material, and human resources most prominent. In contrast, few facilitators were identified varied substantially across countries and evidence implementation products. CONCLUSION: By identifying common barriers and areas requiring additional attention to ensure capture of unique barriers and facilitators, these findings provide a starting point for development of a framework to guide the assessment of barriers to and facilitators of maternal health and potentially to evidence implementation more generally in LMICs.