Suchergebnisse

BACKGROUND: Better understanding, documentation and evaluation of different refugee health interventions and their means of health system integration and intersectoral collaboration are needed. OBJECTIVES: Explore the barriers and facilitators to the integration of health services for refugees; the processes involved and the different stakeholders engaged in levaraging intersectoral approaches to protect refugees' right to health on resettlement. DESIGN: Scoping review. METHODS: A search of articles from 2000 onward was done in MEDLINE, Web of Science, Global Health and PsycINFO, Embase. Two frameworks were applied in our analysis, the 'framework for analysing integration of targeted health interventions in systems' and 'Health in All Policies' framework for country action. A comprehensive description of the methods is included in our published protocol. RESULTS: 6117 papers were identified, only 18 studies met the inclusion criteria. Facilitators in implementation included: training for providers, colocation of services, transportation services to enhance access, clear role definitions and appropriate budget allocation and financing. Barriers included: lack of a participatory approach, insufficient resources for providers, absence of financing, unclear roles and insufficient coordination of interprofessional teams; low availability and use of data, and turf wars across governance stakeholders. Successful strategies to address refugee health included: networks of service delivery combining existing public and private services; system navigators; host community engagement to reduce stigma; translation services; legislative support and alternative models of care for women and children. CONCLUSION: Limited evidence was found overall. Further research on intersectoral approaches is needed. Key policy insights gained from barriers and facilitators reported in available studies include: improving coordination between existing programmes; supporting colocation of services; establishing formal system navigator roles ...

Decentralisation is widely practised but its scrutiny tends to focus on structural and authority changes or outcomes. Politics and process of devolution implementation needs to be better understood to evaluate how national governments use the enhanced decision space for bringing improvements in the health system and the underlying challenges faced. We use the example of Pakistan's radical, politically driven provincial devolution to analyse how national structures use decentralisation opportunities for improved health planning, spending and carrying out transformations to the health system. Our narrative draws on secondary data sources from the PRIMASYS study, supplemented with policy roundtable notes from Pakistan. Our analysis shows that in decentralised Pakistan, health became prioritised for increased government resources and achieved good budgetary use, major strides were made contextualised sector-wide health planning and legislations, and a proliferation seen in governance measures to improve and regulate healthcare delivery. Despite a disadvantaged and abrupt start to devolution, high ownership by politicians and bureaucracy in provincial governments led to resourcing, planning and innovations. However, effective translation remained impeded by weak institutional capacity, feeble federal-provincial coordination and vulnerability to interference by local elites. Building on this illustrative example, we propose (1) political management of decentralisation for effective national coordination, sustaining stable leadership and protecting from political interfere by local elites; (2) investment in stewardship capacity in the devolved structures as well as the central ministry to deliver on new roles.

Decentralisation is widely practised but its scrutiny tends to focus on structural and authority changes or outcomes. Politics and process of devolution implementation needs to be better understood to evaluate how national governments use the enhanced decision space for bringing improvements in the health system and the underlying challenges faced. We use the example of Pakistan's radical, politically driven provincial devolution to analyse how national structures use decentralisation opportunities for improved health planning, spending and carrying out transformations to the health system. Our narrative draws on secondary data sources from the PRIMASYS study, supplemented with policy roundtable notes from Pakistan. Our analysis shows that in decentralised Pakistan, health became prioritised for increased government resources and achieved good budgetary use, major strides were made contextualised sector-wide health planning and legislations, and a proliferation seen in governance measures to improve and regulate healthcare delivery. Despite a disadvantaged and abrupt start to devolution, high ownership by politicians and bureaucracy in provincial governments led to resourcing, planning and innovations. However, effective translation remained impeded by weak institutional capacity, feeble federal–provincial coordination and vulnerability to interference by local elites. Building on this illustrative example, we propose (1) political management of decentralisation for effective national coordination, sustaining stable leadership and protecting from political interfere by local elites; (2) investment in stewardship capacity in the devolved structures as well as the central ministry to deliver on new roles.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to identify knowledge translation (KT) strategies aimed at improving sexual, reproductive, maternal, newborn, child and adolescent health (SRMNCAH) and well-being. DESIGN: Rapid scoping review. SEARCH STRATEGY: A comprehensive and peer-reviewed search strategy was developed and applied to four electronic databases: MEDLINE ALL, Embase, CINAHL and Web of Science. Additional searches of grey literature were conducted to identify KT strategies aimed at supporting SRMNCAH. KT strategies and policies published in English from January 2000 to May 2020 onwards were eligible for inclusion. RESULTS: Only 4% of included 90 studies were conducted in low-income countries with the majority (52%) conducted in high-income countries. Studies primarily focused on maternal newborn or child health and well-being. Education (81%), including staff workshops and education modules, was the most commonly identified intervention component from the KT interventions. Low-income and middle-income countries were more likely to include civil society organisations, government and policymakers as stakeholders compared with high-income countries. Reported barriers to KT strategies included limited resources and time constraints, while enablers included stakeholder involvement throughout the KT process. CONCLUSION: We identified a number of gaps among KT strategies for SRMNCAH policy and action, including limited focus on adolescent, sexual and reproductive health and rights and SRMNCAH financing strategies. There is a need to support stakeholder engagement in KT interventions across the continuum of SRMNCAH services. Researchers and policymakers should consider enhancing efforts to work with multisectoral stakeholders to implement future KT strategies and policies to address SRMNCAH priorities. REGISTRATION: The rapid scoping review protocol was registered on Open Science Framework on 16 June 2020 (https://osf.io/xpf2k).

This paper is the initial Position Statement of Evidence Synthesis International, a new partnership of organizations that produce, support and use evidence synthesis around the world. The paper (i) argues for the importance of synthesis as a research exercise to clarify what is known from research evidence to inform policy, practice and personal decision making; (ii) discusses core issues for research synthesis such as the role of research evidence in decision making, the role of perspectives, participation and democracy in research and synthesis as a core component of evidence ecosystems; (iii) argues for 9 core principles for ESI on the nature and role of research synthesis; and (iv) lists the 5 main goals of ESI as a coordinating partnership for promoting and enabling the production and use of research synthesis. ; publishedVersion