Enhancing evidence informed policymaking in complex health systems: lessons from multi-site collaborative approaches

被引:84
作者
Langlois, Etienne V. [1 ]
Montekio, Victor Becerril [2 ]
Young, Taryn [3 ,4 ]
Song, Kayla [5 ]
Alcalde-Rabanal, Jacqueline [2 ]
Nhan Tran [1 ]
机构
[1] WHO, Alliance Hlth Policy & Syst Res, 20 Ave Appia, CH-1211 Geneva, Switzerland
[2] Natl Inst Publ Hlth, Ctr Hlth Syst Res, Ave Univ 655, Cuernavaca 62100, Morelos, Mexico
[3] Univ Stellenbosch, Fac Med & Hlth Sci, Dept Interdisciplinary Hlth Sci, Ctr Evidence Based Hlth Care, POB 241, ZA-8000 Cape Town, South Africa
[4] South African Med Res Council, Cochrane South Africa, Cape Town, South Africa
[5] Univ Toronto, Inst Hlth Policy Management & Evaluat, Hlth Syst Performance Res Network, 155 Coll St,Suite 425, Toronto, ON M5T 3M6, Canada
来源
HEALTH RESEARCH POLICY AND SYSTEMS | 2016年 / 14卷
关键词
Capacity strengthening; Communities of practice; Complex health system; Decision making; Embedded research; Evidence-informed policy; Health policy; Health systems research; Low- and middle-income countries; Policymaking; Systematic reviews; Use of evidence; KNOWLEDGE; COUNTRIES; CAPACITY; THINKING; SUPPORT; INCOME;
D O I
10.1186/s12961-016-0089-0
中图分类号
R19 [保健组织与事业(卫生事业管理)];
学科分类号
摘要
Background: There is an increasing interest worldwide to ensure evidence-informed health policymaking as a means to improve health systems performance. There is a need to engage policymakers in collaborative approaches to generate and use knowledge in real world settings. To address this gap, we implemented two interventions based on iterative exchanges between researchers and policymakers/implementers. This article aims to reflect on the implementation and impact of these multi-site evidence-to-policy approaches implemented in low-resource settings. Methods: The first approach was implemented in Mexico and Nicaragua and focused on implementation research facilitated by communities of practice (CoP) among maternal health stakeholders. We conducted a process evaluation of the CoPs and assessed the professionals' abilities to acquire, analyse, adapt and apply research. The second approach, called the Policy BUilding Demand for evidence in Decision making through Interaction and Enhancing Skills (Policy BUDDIES), was implemented in South Africa and Cameroon. The intervention put forth a 'buddying' process to enhance demand and use of systematic reviews by sub-national policymakers. The Policy BUDDIES initiative was assessed using a mixed-methods realist evaluation design. Results: In Mexico, the implementation research supported by CoPs triggered monitoring by local health organizations of the quality of maternal healthcare programs. Health programme personnel involved in CoPs in Mexico and Nicaragua reported improved capacities to identify and use evidence in solving implementation problems. In South Africa, Policy BUDDIES informed a policy framework for medication adherence for chronic diseases, including both HIV and non-communicable diseases. Policymakers engaged in the buddying process reported an enhanced recognition of the value of research, and greater demand for policy-relevant knowledge. Conclusions: The collaborative evidence-to-policy approaches underline the importance of iterations and continuity in the engagement of researchers and policymakers/programme managers, in order to account for swift evolutions in health policy planning and implementation. In developing and supporting evidence-to-policy interventions, due consideration should be given to fit-for-purpose approaches, as different needs in policymaking cycles require adapted processes and knowledge. Greater consideration should be provided to approaches embedding the use of research in real-world policymaking, better suited to the complex adaptive nature of health systems.
引用
收藏
页数:11
相关论文
empty
未找到相关数据