Lay health workers in primary and community health care for maternal and child health: identification and treatment of wasting in children.

BACKGROUND: Since the early 2010s, there has been a push to enhance the capacity to effectively treat wasting in children through community-based service delivery models and thus reduce morbidity and mortality. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of identification and treatment of moderate and severe wasting in children aged five years or under by lay health workers working in the community compared with health providers working in health facilities. SEARCH METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, CENTRAL, two other databases, and two ongoing trials registers to 24 September 2021. We also screened the reference lists of related systematic reviews and all included studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomised studies in children aged five years or under with moderate wasting (defined as weight-for-height Z-score (WHZ) below -2 but no lower than ≥ -3, or mid-upper-arm circumference (MUAC) below 125 mm but no lower than 115 mm, and no nutritional oedema) or severe wasting (WHZ below -3 or MUAC below 115 mm or nutritional oedema). Eligible interventions were: • identification by lay health workers (LHWs) of children with wasting (intervention 1); • identification by LHWs of children with wasting and medical complications needing referral (intervention 2); and • identification by LHWs of children with wasting without medical complications needing referral (intervention 3). Eligible comparators were: • identification and treatment of wasting by health professionals such as nurses or doctors (at health facilities); and • identification and treatment of wasting by health facility-based teams, including health professionals and LHWs. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently screened trials, extracted data and assessed risk of bias using the Cochrane risk of bias tool (RoB 2) and Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care (EPOC) guidelines. We used a random-effects model to meta-analyse data, producing risk ratios (RRs) for dichotomous outcomes in trials with individual allocation, adjusted RRs for dichotomous outcomes in trials with cluster allocation (using the generic inverse variance method in Review Manager 5), and mean differences (MDs) for continuous outcomes. We used the GRADE approach to assess the certainty of the evidence. MAIN RESULTS: We included two RCTs and five non-RCTs. Six studies were from African countries, and one was from Pakistan. Six studies included children with severe wasting, and one included children with moderate wasting. All studies offered home-based ready-to-use therapeutic food treatment and monitoring. Children received antibiotics in three studies, vitamins or micronutrients in three studies, and deworming treatment in two studies. In three studies, the comparison arm involved LHWs screening children for malnutrition and referring them to health facilities for diagnosis and treatment. All the non-randomised studies had a high overall risk of bias. Interventions 1 and 2 Identification and referral for treatment by LHWs, compared with treatment by health professionals following self-referral, may result in little or no difference in the percentage of children who recover from moderate or severe wasting (MD 1.00%, 95% confidence interval (CI) -2.53 to 4.53; 1 RCT, 29,475 households; low certainty). Intervention 3 Compared with treatment by health professionals following identification by LHWs, identification and treatment of severe wasting in children by LHWs: • may slightly reduce improvement from severe wasting (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.86 to 0.99; 1 RCT, 789 participants; low certainty); • may slightly increase non-response to treatment (RR 1.44, 95% CI 1.04 to 2.01; 1 RCT, 789 participants; low certainty); • may result in little or no difference in the number of children with WHZ above -2 on discharge (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.28 to 3.18; 1 RCT, 789 participants; low certainty); • probably results in little or no difference in the number of children with WHZ between -3 and -2 on discharge (RR 1.09, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.36; 1 RCT, 789 participants; moderate certainty); • probably results in little or no difference in the number of children with WHZ below -3 (severe wasting) on discharge (RR 1.23, 95% CI 0.75 to 2.04; 1 RCT, 789 participants; moderate certainty); • probably results in little or no difference in the number of children with MUAC equal to or greater than 115 mm on discharge (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.06; 1 RCT, 789 participants; moderate certainty); • results in little or no difference in weight gain per day (mean weight gain 0.50 g/kg/day higher, 95% CI 1.74 lower to 2.74 higher; 1 RCT, 571 participants; high certainty); • probably has little or no effect on relapse of severe wasting (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.54; 1 RCT, 649 participants; moderate certainty); • may have little or no effect on mortality among children with severe wasting (RR 0.46, 95% CI 0.04 to 5.98; 1 RCT, 829 participants; low certainty); • probably has little or no effect on the transfer of children with severe wasting to inpatient care (RR 3.71, 95% CI 0.36 to 38.23; 1 RCT, 829 participants; moderate certainty); and • probably has little or no effect on the default of children with severe wasting (RR 1.48, 95% CI 0.65 to 3.40; 1 RCT, 829 participants; moderate certainty). The evidence was very uncertain for total MUAC gain, MUAC gain per day, total weight gain, treatment coverage, and transfer to another LHW site or health facility. No studies examined sustained recovery, deterioration to severe wasting, appropriate identification of children with wasting or oedema, appropriate referral of children with moderate or severe wasting, adherence, or adverse effects and other harms. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Identification and treatment of severe wasting in children who do not require inpatient care by LHWs, compared with treatment by health professionals, may lead to similar or slightly poorer outcomes. We found only two RCTs, and the evidence from non-randomised studies was of very low certainty for all outcomes due to serious risks of bias and imprecision. No studies included children aged under 6 months. Future studies must address these methodological issues.

Implementing the skilled birth attendance strategy in Uganda: a policy analysis.

BACKGROUND: Uganda, a low resource country, implemented the skilled attendance at birth strategy, to meet a key target of the 5th Millenium Development Goal (MDG), 75% reduction in maternal mortality ratio. Maternal mortality rates remained high, despite the improvement in facility delivery rates. In this paper, we analyse the strategies implemented and bottlenecks experienced as Uganda's skilled birth attendance policy was rolled out. These experiences provide important lessons for decision makers as they implement policies to further improve maternity care. METHODS: This is a case study of the implementation process, involving a document review and in-depth interviews among key informants selected from the Ministry of Health, Professional Organisations, Ugandan Parliament, the Health Service Commission, the private not-for-profit sector, non-government organisations, and District Health Officers. The Walt and Gilson health policy triangle guided data collection and analysis. RESULTS: The skilled birth attendance policy was an important priority on Uganda's maternal health agenda and received strong political commitment, and support from development partners and national stakeholders. Considerable effort was devoted to implementation of this policy through strategies to increase the availability of skilled health workers for instance through expanded midwifery training, and creation of the comprehensive nurse midwife cadre. In addition, access to emergency obstetric care improved to some extent as the physical infrastructure expanded, and distribution of medicines and supplies improved. However, health worker recruitment was slow in part due to the restrictive staff norms that were remnants of previous policies. Despite considerable resources allocated to creating the comprehensive nurse midwife cadre, this resulted in nurses that lacked midwifery skills, while the training of specialised midwives reduced. The rate of expansion of the physical infrastructure outpaced the available human resources, equipment, blood infrastructure, and several health facilities were not fully functional. CONCLUSION: Uganda's skilled birth attendance policy aimed to increase access to obstetric care, but recruitment of human resources, and infrastructural capacity to provide good quality care remain a challenge. This study highlights the complex issues and unexpected consequences of policy implementation. Further evaluation of this policy is needed as decision-makers develop strategies to improve access to skilled care at birth.

Ugandan health workers' and mothers' views and experiences of the quality of maternity care and the use of informal solutions: A qualitative study.

INTRODUCTION: Although the coverage of maternity services in some low and middle-income countries (LMIC) has greatly improved, the quality of maternity care remains poor, and maternal mortality rates are high. In this study, we describe the meaning and determinants of maternity care quality from the perspective of health workers and mothers in Uganda, the informal solutions used by health workers to manage their daily challenges, and we suggest ways in which maternal care quality can be improved. METHODS: We conducted a qualitative study in the Mpigi and Rukungiri districts of Uganda. Twenty-eight health workers based at selected health centres participated in structured interviews. Thirty-six mothers, half of whom had delivered at health facilities, participated in focus group discussions. Data were analysed thematically, and informed by the WHO framework on quality of care for maternal and newborn health and by Lipsky's street level bureaucracy concept. RESULTS: According to health workers, knowledge of clinical standards and processes, timeliness, and women's choice during labour, as well as resources, physical infrastructure; collaboration with mothers, professionals and community health workers; were important aspects of good quality care. Mothers' perceptions of good quality care were largely similar to health workers' views, though mothers were more concerned about health workers' interaction skills. Structural challenges sometimes led health workers to develop informal solutions such as asking mothers to purchase their own supplies with variable implications on the quality of care. While several of these informal solutions were useful in addressing bottlenecks in the health system, they sometimes placed additional burdens and personal costs on health workers, created mistrust, inequity in care and negative experiences among mothers who could not afford the extra costs. CONCLUSIONS: Health system structural factors; including technical, interpersonal, resource and infrastructural factors; impede the provision and experience of good quality maternity care at health centres in Uganda. Improving the quality of care will require strategies that address these core problems in the health system structure. Such structural reforms will require political support to commit resources, skilful management and leadership that seek to change organisational behaviour and build trust through good quality, woman-centred maternity care.

Factors that influence the provision of intrapartum and postnatal care by skilled birth attendants in low- and middle-income countries: a qualitative evidence synthesis.

BACKGROUND: In many low- and middle-income countries women are encouraged to give birth in clinics and hospitals so that they can receive care from skilled birth attendants. A skilled birth attendant (SBA) is a health worker such as a midwife, doctor, or nurse who is trained to manage normal pregnancy and childbirth. (S)he is also trained to identify, manage, and refer any health problems that arise for mother and baby. The skills, attitudes and behaviour of SBAs, and the extent to which they work in an enabling working environment, impact on the quality of care provided. If any of these factors are missing, mothers and babies are likely to receive suboptimal care. OBJECTIVES: To explore the views, experiences, and behaviours of skilled birth attendants and those who support them; to identify factors that influence the delivery of intrapartum and postnatal care in low- and middle-income countries; and to explore the extent to which these factors were reflected in intervention studies. SEARCH METHODS: Our search strategies specified key and free text terms related to the perinatal period, and the health provider, and included methodological filters for qualitative evidence syntheses and for low- and middle-income countries. We searched MEDLINE, OvidSP (searched 21 November 2016), Embase, OvidSP (searched 28 November 2016), PsycINFO, OvidSP (searched 30 November 2016), POPLINE, K4Health (searched 30 November 2016), CINAHL, EBSCOhost (searched 30 November 2016), ProQuest Dissertations and Theses (searched 15 August 2013), Web of Science (searched 1 December 2016), World Health Organization Reproductive Health Library (searched 16 August 2013), and World Health Organization Global Health Library for WHO databases (searched 1 December 2016). SELECTION CRITERIA: We included qualitative studies that focused on the views, experiences, and behaviours of SBAs and those who work with them as part of the team. We included studies from all levels of health care in low- and middle-income countries. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: One review author extracted data and assessed study quality, and another review author checked the data. We synthesised data using the best fit framework synthesis approach and assessed confidence in the evidence using the GRADE-CERQual (Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative research) approach. We used a matrix approach to explore whether the factors identified by health workers in our synthesis as important for providing maternity care were reflected in the interventions evaluated in the studies in a related intervention review. MAIN RESULTS: We included 31 studies that explored the views and experiences of different types of SBAs, including doctors, midwives, nurses, auxiliary nurses and their managers. The included studies took place in Africa, Asia, and Latin America.Our synthesis pointed to a number of factors affecting SBAs' provision of quality care. The following factors were based on evidence assessed as of moderate to high confidence. Skilled birth attendants reported that they were not always given sufficient training during their education or after they had begun clinical work. Also, inadequate staffing of facilities could increase the workloads of skilled birth attendants, make it difficult to provide supervision and result in mothers being offered poorer care. In addition, SBAs did not always believe that their salaries and benefits reflected their tasks and responsibilities and the personal risks they undertook. Together with poor living and working conditions, these issues were seen to increase stress and to negatively affect family life. Some SBAs also felt that managers lacked capacity and skills, and felt unsupported when their workplace concerns were not addressed.Possible causes of staff shortages in facilities included problems with hiring and assigning health workers to facilities where they were needed; lack of funding; poor management and bureaucratic systems; and low salaries. Skilled birth attendants and their managers suggested factors that could help recruit, keep, and motivate health workers, and improve the quality of care; these included good-quality housing, allowances for extra work, paid vacations, continuing education, appropriate assessments of their work, and rewards.Skilled birth attendants' ability to provide quality care was also limited by a lack of equipment, supplies, and drugs; blood and the infrastructure to manage blood transfusions; electricity and water supplies; and adequate space and amenities on maternity wards. These factors were seen to reduce SBAs' morale, increase their workload and infection risk, and make them less efficient in their work. A lack of transport sometimes made it difficult for SBAs to refer women on to higher levels of care. In addition, women's negative perceptions of the health system could make them reluctant to accept referral.We identified some other factors that also may have affected the quality of care, which were based on findings assessed as of low or very low confidence. Poor teamwork and lack of trust and collaboration between health workers appeared to negatively influence care. In contrast, good collaboration and teamwork appeared to increase skilled birth attendants' motivation, their decision-making abilities, and the quality of care. Skilled birth attendants' workloads and staff shortages influenced their interactions with mothers. In addition, poor communication undermined trust between skilled birth attendants and mothers. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Many factors influence the care that SBAs are able to provide to mothers during childbirth. These include access to training and supervision; staff numbers and workloads; salaries and living conditions; and access to well-equipped, well-organised healthcare facilities with water, electricity, and transport. Other factors that may play a role include the existence of teamwork and of trust, collaboration, and communication between health workers and with mothers. Skilled birth attendants reported many problems tied to all of these factors.

Interventions aimed at communities to inform and/or educate about early childhood vaccination.

BACKGROUND: A range of strategies are used to communicate with parents, caregivers and communities regarding child vaccination in order to inform decisions and improve vaccination uptake. These strategies include interventions in which information is aimed at larger groups in the community, for instance at public meetings, through radio or through leaflets. This is one of two reviews on communication interventions for childhood vaccination. The companion review focuses on face-to-face interventions for informing or educating parents. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of interventions aimed at communities to inform and/or educate people about vaccination in children six years and younger. SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE and five other databases up to July 2012. We searched for grey literature in the Grey Literature Report and OpenGrey. We also contacted authors of included studies and experts in the field. There were no language, date or settings restrictions. SELECTION CRITERIA: Individual or cluster-randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials, interrupted time series (ITS) and repeated measures studies, and controlled before-and-after (CBA) studies. We included interventions aimed at communities and intended to inform and/or educate about vaccination in children six years and younger, conducted in any setting. We defined interventions aimed at communities as those directed at a geographic area, and/or interventions directed to groups of people who share at least one common social or cultural characteristic. Primary outcomes were: knowledge among participants of vaccines or vaccine-preventable diseases and of vaccine service delivery; child immunisation status; and unintended adverse effects. Secondary outcomes were: participants' attitudes towards vaccination; involvement in decision-making regarding vaccination; confidence in the decision made; and resource use or cost of intervention. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently reviewed the references to identify studies for inclusion. We extracted data and assessed risk of bias in all included studies. MAIN RESULTS: We included two cluster-randomised trials that compared interventions aimed at communities to routine immunisation practices. In one study from India, families, teachers, children and village leaders were encouraged to attend information meetings where they received information about childhood vaccination and could ask questions. In the second study from Pakistan, people who were considered to be trusted in the community were invited to meetings to discuss vaccine coverage rates in their community and the costs and benefits of childhood vaccination. They were asked to develop local action plans and to share the information they had been given and continue the discussions in their communities.The trials show low certainty evidence that interventions aimed at communities to inform and educate about childhood vaccination may improve knowledge of vaccines or vaccine-preventable diseases among intervention participants (adjusted mean difference 0.121, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.055 to 0.189). These interventions probably increase the number of children who are vaccinated. The study from India showed that the intervention probably increased the number of children who received vaccinations (risk ratio (RR) 1.67, 95% CI 1.21 to 2.31; moderate certainty evidence). The study from Pakistan showed that there is probably an increase in the uptake of both measles (RR 1.63, 95% CI 1.03 to 2.58) and DPT (diptheria, pertussis and tetanus) (RR 2.17, 95% CI 1.43 to 3.29) vaccines (both moderate certainty evidence), but there may be little or no difference in the number of children who received polio vaccine (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.05; low certainty evidence). There is also low certainty evidence that these interventions may change attitudes in favour of vaccination among parents with young children (adjusted mean difference 0.054, 95% CI 0.013 to 0.105), but they may make little or no difference to the involvement of mothers in decision-making regarding childhood vaccination (adjusted mean difference 0.043, 95% CI -0.009 to 0.097).The studies did not assess knowledge among participants of vaccine service delivery; participant confidence in the vaccination decision; intervention costs; or any unintended harms as a consequence of the intervention. We did not identify any studies that compared interventions aimed at communities to inform and/or educate with interventions directed to individual parents or caregivers, or studies that compared two interventions aimed at communities to inform and/or educate about childhood vaccination. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: This review provides limited evidence that interventions aimed at communities to inform and educate about early childhood vaccination may improve attitudes towards vaccination and probably increase vaccination uptake under some circumstances. However, some of these interventions may be resource intensive when implemented on a large scale and further rigorous evaluations are needed. These interventions may achieve most benefit when targeted to areas or groups that have low childhood vaccination rates.'

Lay health workers in primary and community health care for maternal and child health and the management of infectious diseases.

BACKGROUND: Lay health workers (LHWs) are widely used to provide care for a broad range of health issues. Little is known, however, about the effectiveness of LHW interventions. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of LHW interventions in primary and community health care on maternal and child health and the management of infectious diseases. SEARCH STRATEGY: For the current version of this review we searched The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (including citations uploaded from the EPOC and the CCRG registers) (The Cochrane Library 2009, Issue 1 Online) (searched 18 February 2009); MEDLINE, Ovid (1950 to February Week 1 2009) (searched 17 February 2009); MEDLINE In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, Ovid (February 13 2009) (searched 17 February 2009); EMBASE, Ovid (1980 to 2009 Week 05) (searched 18 February 2009); AMED, Ovid (1985 to February 2009) (searched 19 February 2009); British Nursing Index and Archive, Ovid (1985 to February 2009) (searched 17 February 2009); CINAHL, Ebsco 1981 to present (searched 07 February 2010); POPLINE (searched 25 February 2009); WHOLIS (searched 16 April 2009); Science Citation Index and Social Sciences Citation Index (ISI Web of Science) (1975 to present) (searched 10 August 2006 and 10 February 2010). We also searched the reference lists of all included papers and relevant reviews, and contacted study authors and researchers in the field for additional papers. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials of any intervention delivered by LHWs (paid or voluntary) in primary or community health care and intended to improve maternal or child health or the management of infectious diseases. A 'lay health worker' was defined as any health worker carrying out functions related to healthcare delivery, trained in some way in the context of the intervention, and having no formal professional or paraprofessional certificate or tertiary education degree. There were no restrictions on care recipients. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently extracted data using a standard form and assessed risk of bias. Studies that compared broadly similar types of interventions were grouped together. Where feasible, the study results were combined and an overall estimate of effect obtained. MAIN RESULTS: Eighty-two studies met the inclusion criteria. These showed considerable diversity in the targeted health issue and the aims, content, and outcomes of interventions. The majority were conducted in high income countries (n = 55) but many of these focused on low income and minority populations. The diversity of included studies limited meta-analysis to outcomes for four study groups. These analyses found evidence of moderate quality of the effectiveness of LHWs in promoting immunisation childhood uptake (RR 1.22, 95% CI 1.10 to 1.37; P = 0.0004); promoting initiation of breastfeeding (RR = 1.36, 95% CI 1.14 to 1.61; P < 0.00001), any breastfeeding (RR 1.24, 95% CI 1.10 to 1.39; P = 0.0004), and exclusive breastfeeding (RR 2.78, 95% CI 1.74 to 4.44; P <0.0001); and improving pulmonary TB cure rates (RR 1.22 (95% CI 1.13 to 1.31) P <0.0001), when compared to usual care. There was moderate quality evidence that LHW support had little or no effect on TB preventive treatment completion (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.09; P = 0.99). There was also low quality evidence that LHWs may reduce child morbidity (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.75 to 0.99; P = 0.03) and child (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.55 to 1.03; P = 0.07) and neonatal (RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.57 to 1.02; P = 0.07) mortality, and increase the likelihood of seeking care for childhood illness (RR 1.33, 95% CI 0.86 to 2.05; P = 0.20). For other health issues, the evidence is insufficient to draw conclusions regarding effectiveness, or to enable the identification of specific LHW training or intervention strategies likely to be most effective. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: LHWs provide promising benefits in promoting immunisation uptake and breastfeeding, improving TB treatment outcomes, and reducing child morbidity and mortality when compared to usual care. For other health issues, evidence is insufficient to draw conclusions about the effects of LHWs.

SUPPORT tools for evidence-informed policymaking in health 11: Finding and using evidence about local conditions.

This article is part of a series written for people responsible for making decisions about health policies and programmes and for those who support these decision makers. Evidence about local conditions is evidence that is available from the specific setting(s) in which a decision or action on a policy or programme option will be taken. Such evidence is always needed, together with other forms of evidence, in order to inform decisions about options. Global evidence is the best starting point for judgements about effects, factors that modify those effects, and insights into ways to approach and address problems. But local evidence is needed for most other judgements about what decisions and actions should be taken. In this article, we suggest five questions that can help to identify and appraise the local evidence that is needed to inform a decision about policy or programme options. These are: 1. What local evidence is needed to inform a decision about options? 2. How can the necessary local evidence be found? 3. How should the quality of the available local evidence be assessed? 4. Are there important variations in the availability, quality or results of local evidence? 5. How should local evidence be incorporated with other information?

SUPPORT tools for evidence-informed policymaking in health 6: Using research evidence to address how an option will be implemented.

This article is part of a series written for people responsible for making decisions about health policies and programmes and for those who support these decision makers. After a policy decision has been made, the next key challenge is transforming this stated policy position into practical actions. What strategies, for instance, are available to facilitate effective implementation, and what is known about the effectiveness of such strategies? We suggest five questions that can be considered by policymakers when implementing a health policy or programme. These are: 1. What are the potential barriers to the successful implementation of a new policy? 2. What strategies should be considered in planning the implementation of a new policy in order to facilitate the necessary behavioural changes among healthcare recipients and citizens? 3. What strategies should be considered in planning the implementation of a new policy in order to facilitate the necessary behavioural changes in healthcare professionals? 4. What strategies should be considered in planning the implementation of a new policy in order to facilitate the necessary organisational changes? 5. What strategies should be considered in planning the implementation of a new policy in order to facilitate the necessary systems changes?

SUPPORT Tools for Evidence-informed Policymaking in health (STP) 6: using research evidence to address how an option will be implemented

This article is part of a series written for people responsible for making decisions about health policies and programmes and for those who support these decision makers. After a policy decision has been made, the next key challenge is transforming this stated policy position into practical actions. What strategies, for instance, are available to facilitate effective implementation, and what is known about the effectiveness of such strategies? We suggest five questions that can be considered by policymakers when implementing a health policy or programme.

Outils du projet SUPPORT pour l´élaboration des politiques de santé éclairées par les données probantes 11: repérer et utiliser les données de recherche sur les réalités locales / SUPPORT Toolkit for Evidence-Informed Health Policy Development 11: Identify and Use Research Data on Local Realities

On entend par données probantes sur les situations locales, les données susceptibles dêtre tirées du milieu dans lequel une décision ou une mesure sera prise en faveur dune politique ou dun programme. Les responsables de politiques ont toujours besoin de ce type de données, parmi dautres, afin déclairer leurs décisions relatives aux propositions de politiques ou de programmes. Les données probantes issues de la recherche mondiale constituent le meilleur point de départ pour porter un jugement sur les effets, les facteurs qui influent sur ces derniers et les perspectives sur les façons daborder les problèmes et de sy attaquer.

STP: Herramientas SUPPORT para la toma de decisiones en políticas de salud informada por la evidencia 11: cómo buscar y usar evidencia sobre condiciones locales / STP: SUPPORT tools for decision-making in health policies informed by evidence 11: how to find and use evidence on local conditions

La evidencia sobre condiciones locales es evidencia que está disponible de los lugares específicos en los cuales se toma una decisión o una medida sobre una opción de política o programa. Tal evidencia siempre es necesaria, junto con otras formas de evidencia, con el fin de informar las decisiones sobre las opciones. La evidencia global es el mejor punto de inicio para los juicios sobre los efectos, los factores que modifican dichos efectos y la compresión sobre las maneras de enfocar y abordar problemas. Pero la evidencia local es necesaria para la mayoría de los demás juicios sobre qué decisiones y medidas deberían tomarse. En este artículo, sugerimos cinco preguntas que pueden ayudar a identificar y evaluar la evidencia local que es necesaria para informar una decisión.

Ferramentas SUPPORT para a elaboração de políticas de saúde baseadas em evidências (STP) 11: busca e uso de evidências sobre condições locais / SUPPORT Tools for Evidence-Based Health Policy Making (STP) 11: Finding and Using Evidence on Local Conditions

Evidências das condições locais são as evidências disponíveis a partir do(s) cenário(s) nos quais uma decisão ou ação será tomada sobre uma política ou programa. Tal evidência é sempre necessária, assim como outras formas de evidências, como apoio na tomada de decisões sobre as opções. Evidência global é o melhor ponto de partida para julgar os efeitos, os fatores que modificam tais efeitos e os insights para abordar e tratar os problemas. Contudo a evidência local é necessária na maioria das outras análises sobre quais decisões e atitudes tomar. Neste artigo, sugerimos cinco questões que ajudarão identificar e avaliar a evidência local necessária como apoio na tomada de uma decisão sobre as opções.

STP: Herramientas SUPPORT para la toma de decisiones en políticas de salud informada por la evidencia 6: cómo utilizar la evidencia de la investigación para abordar de qué manera se implementará una opción / STP: SUPPORT tools for decision-making in health policies informed by evidence 6: how to use research evidence to address how an option will be implemented

Después de que se haya tomado una decisión, el próximo desafío clave es transformar esta posición sobre las políticas en acciones prácticas. ¿Qué estrategias, por ejemplo, están disponibles para facilitar la implementación efectiva, y qué se conoce sobre la efectividad de tales estrategias? Sugerimos cinco preguntas que pueden considerar los responsables de la toma de decisiones en políticas al implementar una política o programa de salud. Estas son: 1. ¿Cuáles son las potenciales barreras para la implementación exitosa de una nueva política? 2. ¿Qué estrategias se deben considerar al planificar la implementación de una nueva política para facilitar los cambios de conducta necesarios entre los ciudadanos y los receptores de atención de la salud? 3. ¿Qué estrat (mais)

Ferramentas SUPPORT para a elaboração de políticas de saúde baseadas em evidências (STP) 6: o uso de evidências de pesquisa para informar como uma opção será implementada / SUPPORT Tools for Evidence-Based Health Policy (STP) 6: Use of research evidence to inform how an option will be implemented

Quando uma decisão sobre uma política é tomada, o próximo grande desafio consiste em transformar esta posição citada da política em ações práticas. Quais estratégias, por exemplo, estão disponíveis para facilitar a implementação eficaz e o que se sabe sobre a eficácia de tais estratégias? Sugerimos cinco perguntas que podem ser levadas em consideração pelos formuladores de políticas ao implementarem um programa ou política de saúde. Estas são: 1. Quais são as barreiras potenciais à implementação bemsucedida de uma nova política? 2. Quais estratégias devem ser consideradas ao se planejar a implementação de uma nova política para permitir que ocorram as mudanças comportamentais necessárias entre os usuários do serviço de saúde e cidadãos? 3. Quais e (mais)