Scaling Up Public Health Interventions: Engaging Partners Across Multiple Levels

Scaling up One Health: A network analysis in Lao PDR

Background

One Health focuses on sustainable health for humans, animals, and ecosystems. The approach has been well demonstrated, yet most efforts have not been scaled up. Understanding the organisations involved in scaling up processes is critical to translating research into practice. The Lao People's Democratic Republic has successfully implemented One Health projects for multiple decades; however, the organisational network has not been described and scaling up efforts have been limited.

Methods

Data from organisations involved in One Health projects over the past five years were collected by key-informant interview or workshop. The network was investigated using a mixture of quantitative network analysis and qualitative thematic analysis.

Results

The organisational network was quantitatively described as sparse and centralised. Organisations were required to harness pre-existing relationships to maximise scarce resources and make co-ordination and alignment of priorities more efficient. A lack of international organisations in the top 10% of resource sharing metrics suggests a potential disconnect between donors. This was reflected in the challenges faced by national organisations and a feeling of being stretched thin over numerous externally funded projects with donor-driven priorities.

Conclusions

It appears that high-level political support for country ownership of development and aid priorities remains unrealised. Developing network capacity and capability may assist scaling up efforts and build resilience in the network and its core organisations. This may allow for the inclusion of more development, education, environment, and water, sanitation, and hygiene organisations that were perceived to be lacking. Future One Health programmes should focus on practical activities that do not overload staff capacity. There is much for One Health to learn about the art of scaling up and organisations are encouraged to include implementation science in their research to inform future scaling up efforts.

How long does it take to scale-up obesity prevention interventions?

OBJECTIVE

The scale-up of evidence-based interventions is necessary to reverse high rates of obesity. However, scale-up doesn't occur frequently nor in a timely manner. While it has been estimated that takes 14-17 years for research translation to occur, the time taken to scale-up prevention interventions is largely unknown. This study examined the time taken to scale-up obesity prevention interventions across four scale-up pathways.

METHODS

A sample of obesity prevention interventions that had been scaled-up or implemented at scale were found using a structured search strategy. Included interventions were mapped against four scale-up pathways and timeframes associated with each stage of the scale-up pathway were identified to determine the time taken to scale-up.

RESULTS

Of the 90 interventions found that were scaled-up to at least a city-wide level, less than half reported a comprehensive research pathway to scale-up and a third did not report any evidence of efficacy or effectiveness prior to scale-up. The time taken to scale-up ranged from 0 to 5 years depending on the pathway taken. Those following a comprehensive pathway took approximately 5 years to scale-up, while interventions that had only one evidence generating step took between 1 and 1.5 years to scale-up. For the remaining interventions, scale-up occurred immediately post-development without evidence generation.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings indicate that the scale-up of obesity prevention interventions can occur more quickly than previous estimates of 14-17 years. Our findings support previous research that scale-up of interventions occurs through a variety of pathways and often scale-up occurs in absence of prior evidence of effectiveness.

Challenges and Opportunities for Paving the Road to Global Health Equity Through Implementation Science

Implementation science focuses on enhancing the widespread uptake of evidence-based interventions into routine practice to improve population health. However, optimizing implementation science to promote health equity in domestic and global resource-limited settings requires considering historical and sociopolitical processes (e.g., colonization, structural racism) and centering in local sociocultural and indigenous cultures and values. This review weaves together principles of decolonization and antiracism to inform critical and reflexive perspectives on partnerships that incorporate a focus on implementation science, with the goal of making progress toward global health equity. From an implementation science perspective, wesynthesize examples of public health evidence-based interventions, strategies, and outcomes applied in global settings that are promising for health equity, alongside a critical examination of partnerships, context, and frameworks operationalized in these studies. We conclude with key future directions to optimize the application of implementation science with a justice orientation to promote global health equity.

Informing the development of the SUCCEED reporting guideline for studies on the scaling of health interventions: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Quality reporting contributes to effective translation of health research in practice and policy. As an initial step in the development of a reporting guideline for scaling, the Standards for reporting stUdies of sCaling evidenCEd-informED interventions (SUCCEED), we performed a systematic review to identify relevant guidelines and compile a list of potential items.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review according to Cochrane method guidelines. We searched the following databases: MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, Web of Science, from their respective inceptions. We also searched websites of relevant organizations and Google. We included any document that provided instructions or recommendations, e.g., reporting guideline, checklist, guidance, framework, standard; could inform the design or reporting of scaling interventions; and related to the health sector. We extracted characteristics of the included guidelines and assessed their methodological quality using a 3-item internal validity assessment tool. We extracted all items from the guidelines and classified them according to the main sections of reporting guidelines (title, abstract, introduction, methods, results, discussion and other information). We performed a narrative synthesis based on descriptive statistics.

RESULTS

Of 7704 records screened (published between 1999 and 2019), we included 39 guidelines, from which data were extracted from 57 reports. Of the 39 guidelines, 17 were for designing scaling interventions and 22 for reporting implementation interventions. At least one female author was listed in 31 guidelines, and 21 first authors were female. None of the authors belonged to the patient stakeholder group. Only one guideline clearly identified a patient as having participated in the consensus process. More than half the guidelines (56%) had been developed using an evidence-based process. In total, 750 items were extracted from the 39 guidelines and distributed into the 7 main sections.

CONCLUSION

Relevant items identified could inform the development of a reporting guideline for scaling studies of evidence-based health interventions. This and our assessment of guidelines could contribute to better reporting in the science and practice of scaling.

Applying Human-Centered Design to Replicate an Adolescent Sexual and Reproductive Health Intervention: A Case Study of Binti Shupavu in Kenya

We present a case study describing the use of human-centered design (HCD) to determine how to adapt intervention components from an existing contraceptive uptake program for adolescent girls in 4 geographical contexts (Ethiopia, northern Nigeria, southern Nigeria, and Tanzania) for use in Kenya. First, we prioritized existing intervention components to be tested in Kenya using sacrificial concepts. Through these concepts, we identified key insights and behavioral archetypes from which to build higher-fidelity prototypes, leveraging existing program knowledge and resources while responding to unique opportunities for Kenyan adolescent girls. After 2 rounds of prototyping, we launched a high-fidelity intervention designed to improve contraceptive uptake among girls. We used program experience to identify strategies for improvement during early implementation. The resulting model, Binti Shupavu, is designed to tap into girls' aspirations and connect them with contraceptive use, build their trust in the health system, and work with influencers to build support for adolescent contraceptive use, following the global user journey. In the first year of implementation (January-December 2022), the intervention was scaled from 90 facilities to 360 facilities and reached 60,111 adolescent girls aged 10-19 years. Of these, 21,698 were new voluntary contraceptive users (36%) and an additional 3,873 (19%) were continuing users.Our design process suggests that HCD is a promising tool for navigating replication. The emphasis on users' perspectives, testing to learn, and collaboration facilitated a deep understanding of the new user population, thus guiding program designers to balance using existing components with developing new ones based on the population's unique needs. Finally, HCD has potential to support the localization agenda if design teams are supported by national, regional, and global experts to be aware of and use the evidence and implementation experience from earlier work.

External context in individual placement and support implementation: a scoping review with abductive thematic analysis

BACKGROUND

Context including the external context may considerably affect the adoption, implementation, sustainment, and scale-up of evidence-based practices. We investigated external contextual features by conducting a scoping review of empirical research regarding the implementation of an evidence-based psychiatric or mental health vocational rehabilitation service called Individual Placement and Support (IPS).

METHODS

The protocol for the scoping review was registered with the Open Science Framework. We used the methodology by Joanna Briggs Institute for conducting the scoping review and reported it according to the PRISMA-ScR checklist. We searched 12 databases for research regarding 'Individual Placement and Support' or 'Evidence-Based Supported Employment'. We retained peer-reviewed empirical studies investigating external contextual factors and their impact on IPS implementation outcomes. We extracted data from the eligible articles and conducted descriptive and thematic analyses.

RESULTS

Fifty-nine original research papers met our eligibility requirements and were retained after reviewing 1124 titles and abstracts and 119 full texts. The analysis generated two main themes: (1) external contextual determinants of service delivery and (2) external systems influencing the evidence-to-practice process. The first main theme encompassed policies and laws, financing, and administratively instituted support resources, and organizational arrangements associated with external stakeholders that may facilitate or hinder the local implementation. The second main theme comprised strategies and actions used by different stakeholders to facilitate implementation locally or scale-up efforts at a system level.

DISCUSSION

Our scoping review illustrates the important role that external contextual factors play and how they may facilitate or hinder the implementation and scale-up of the IPS model across mental health services in different countries. Consideration of these factors by decision-makers in mental health and welfare services, planners, providers, and practitioners is likely to facilitate the development of effective strategies for bridging the evidence-practice gap in implementing the EBPs. Finally, the scoping review identified gaps in knowledge and offered suggestions for future research.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Open Science Framework.

From an interventional study to a national scale-up: lessons learned from the Malakit strategy at the French Guiana-Suriname border

Scaling-up an experimental intervention is always a challenge. On the border between French Guiana, Brazil and Suriname, an interventional study demonstrated the effectiveness of distributing self-diagnosis and self-treatment kits (Malakits) to control malaria in mobile and hard-to-reach populations. Its integration into the Suriname's National Malaria Elimination Plan after a 2-year experiment faced numerous challenges, including human resources to cope with the additional workload of coordinators and to maintain the motivation of community health workers. The economic recession in Suriname, the Covid pandemic, and logistical issues also hampered the scale-up. Finally, thanks to the commitment of stakeholders in Suriname and French Guiana, the integration of Malakit distribution into the Surinamese national programme was proved possible.

Multi-level stakeholders' perspectives on implementation and scaling up community-based health promotion in Germany

Community-based health promotion has the potential to address existing health inequities, although such approaches are scarcely scaled up. For a successful scale up, various stakeholders at different levels and sectors need to be involved. The article's aims are to assess what kind of external support communities need for implementation and to identify facilitators and barriers for scaling up community-based health promotion. Two national digital workshops were conducted in Germany with stakeholders at the community level (n = 161) and with stakeholders at the federal and state levels (n = 84). Protocols were compiled and coded using qualitative content analysis. During the first workshop, we revealed 11 themes for external support needs ('Strategic approach', 'Define & compare indicators', 'International human resource', 'Tools & Aids', 'External conduction of the assessment', 'Involvement of people in difficult life situations', 'Overview of actors', 'Moderation', 'Obtain funding', 'Quality assurance/evaluation' and 'External support'). Eleven facilitators and barriers were identified for scaling up ('Assessment and evaluation', 'Intersectoral collaboration and partnerships', 'Communication', 'Characteristics of the program', 'Political and legal conditions', 'Political support', 'Local coordinator', 'Resources', 'Participation', 'Strategic planning/methods' and 'Intermediary organization'). The identified results provide practice-based evidence on support needed for scaling up, facilitators that promote scaling up and barriers that might hinder scaling up community-based health promotion in Germany. In a next step, this practice-based evidence needs to be systematically integrated with scientific-based evidence on key components for scaling up such approaches for the development of an effective scaling-up concept.

Tensions and Paradoxes of Scaling Up: A Critical Reflection on Physical Activity Promotion

Achieving system-level, sustainable 'scale-up' of interventions is the epitome of successful translation of evidence-based approaches in population health. In physical activity promotion, few evidence-based interventions reach implementation at scale or become embedded within systems for sustainable health impact. This is despite the vast published literature describing efficacy studies of small-scale physical activity interventions. Research into physical activity scale-up (through case-study analysis; evaluations of scale-up processes in implementation trials; and mapping the processes, strategies, and principles for scale-up) has identified barriers and facilitators to intervention expansion. Many interventions are implemented at scale by governments but have not been evaluated or have unpublished evaluation information. Further, few public health interventions have evaluations that reveal the costs and benefits of scaled-up implementation. This lack of economic information introduces an additional element of risk for decision makers when deciding which physical activity interventions should be supported with scarce funding resources. Decision-makers face many other challenges when scaling interventions which do not relate to formal research trials of scale-up; Methods: To explore these issues, a multidisciplinary two-day workshop involving experts in physical activity scale-up was convened by the University of Newcastle, Australia, and the University of Ottawa, Canada (February 2019); Results: In this paper we discuss some of the scale-up tensions (challenges and conflicts) and paradoxes (things that are contrary to expectations) that emerged from this workshop in the context of the current literature and our own experiences in this field. We frame scale-up tensions according to epistemology, methodology, time, and partnerships; and paradoxes as 'reach without scale', 'planned serendipity' and 'simple complexity'. We reflect on the implications of these scale-up tensions and paradoxes, providing considerations for future scale-up research and practice moving forward; Conclusions: In this paper, we delve deeper into stakeholders' assumptions, processes and expectations of scaling up, and challenge in what ways as stakeholders, we all contribute to desired or undesired outcomes. Through a lens of 'tensions' and 'paradoxes', we make an original contribution to the scale-up literature that might influence current perspectives of scaling-up, provide future approaches for physical activity promotion, and contribute to understanding of dynamic of research-practice partnerships.

Tailoring implementation strategies for scale-up: Preparing to take the Med-South Lifestyle program to scale statewide

Background

Tailoring implementation strategies for scale-up involves engaging stakeholders, identifying implementation determinants, and designing implementation strategies to target those determinants. The purpose of this paper is to describe the multiphase process used to engage stakeholders in tailoring strategies to scale-up the Med-South Lifestyle Program, a research-supported lifestyle behavior change intervention that translates the Mediterranean dietary pattern for the southeastern US.

Methods

Guided by Barker et al. framework, we tailored scale-up strategies over four-phases. In Phase 1, we engaged stakeholders from delivery systems that implement lifestyle interventions and from support systems that provide training and other support for statewide scale-up. In Phase 2, we partnered with delivery systems (community health centers and health departments) to design and pilot test implementation strategies (2014-2019). In Phase 3, we partnered with both delivery and support systems to tailor Phase 2 strategies for scale-up (2019-2021) and are now testing those tailored strategies in a type 3 hybrid study (2021-2023). This paper reports on the Phase 3 methods used to tailor implementation strategies for scale-up. To identify determinants of scale-up, we surveyed North Carolina delivery systems (n = 114 community health centers and health departments) and elicited input from delivery and support system stakeholders. We tailored strategies to address identified determinants by adapting the form of Phase 2 strategies while retaining their functions. We pilot tested strategies in three sites and collected data on intermediate, implementation, and effectiveness outcomes.

Findings

Determinants of scale-up included limited staffing, competing priorities, and safety concerns during COVID-19, among others. Tailoring yielded two levels of implementation strategies. At the level of the delivery system, strategies included implementation teams, an implementation blueprint, and cyclical small tests of change. At the level of the support system, strategies included training, educational materials, quality monitoring, and technical assistance. Findings from the pilot study provide evidence for the implementation strategies' reach, acceptability, and feasibility, with mixed findings on fidelity. Strategies were only moderately successful at building delivery system capacity to implement Med-South.

Conclusions

This paper describes the multiphase approach used to plan for Med-South scale-up, including the methods used to tailor two-levels of implementation strategies by identifying and targeting multilevel determinants.