From papers to practices: district level priority setting processes and criteria for family planning, maternal, newborn and child health interventions in Tanzania

Health technology assessment for sexual reproductive health and rights benefits package design in sub-Saharan Africa: A scoping review of evidence-informed deliberative processes

BACKGROUND

Health technology assessment uses a multidisciplinary approach to support health benefits package design towards universal health coverage. The evidence-informed deliberative process framework has been used alongside Health technology assessment to enhance stakeholder participation and deliberations in health benefits package design. Applying the evidence-informed deliberative framework for Health assessment could support the morally diverse sexual reproductive health and rights (SRHR) benefits package design process. However, evidence on participation and deliberations for stakeholders in health technology assessment for SRHR benefits package design has not been curated in sub-Saharan Africa. This study synthesises literature to fill this gap.

METHODS

This scoping review applies the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses extension for scoping reviews, and deductive analysis following the evidence-informed deliberative processes framework. The search strategy uses the Guttmacher-Lancet Commission-proposed comprehensive definition of SRHR and the World Health Organisation's universal health coverage compendium of SRHR interventions to generate search terms. Six databases and biographical hand searches were used to identify studies in Sub-Saharan Africa from 1994.

RESULTS

A total of 14 studies met the inclusion criteria. Evidence for yearly public budgets and explicit SRHR health technology assessment processes was not found. In 12 of the studies reviewed, new advisory committees were set up specifically for health technology assessment for SRHR priority-setting and benefits package design. In all decision-making processes reviewed, the committee member roles, participation and deliberations processes, and stakeholder veto powers were not clearly defined. Patients, the public, and producers of health technology were often excluded in the health technology assessment for the SRHR benefits package design. Most health technology assessment processes identified at least one decision-making criterion but failed to use this in their selection and appraisal stages for SRHR benefits design. The identification, selection, and scoping stages in health technology assessment for SRHR were non-existent in most studies. In 11 of the 14 processes of the included studies, stakeholders were dissatisfied with the health policy recommendation from the appraisal process in health technology assessment. Perceived benefits for evidence-informed deliberative processes included increased stakeholder engagement and fairness in decision-making.

CONCLUSION

To support the integration of diverse social values in health technology assessment for fairer SRHR benefits package design, evidence from this review suggests the need to institutionalise health technology assessment, establish prioritisation decision criteria, involve all relevant stakeholders, and standardise the process and assessment methodological approaches.

Health care prioritization process for the elderly in rural Tanzania under decentralized system: Prospects and challenges

INTRODUCTION

Beginning the early 1990s, many countries globally adopted the third-generation health sector reforms with a focus of strengthening the primary health care system through community participation. On the contrary, three decades later, primary health care systems in many Low- and Middle-Income countries (LMICs) including Tanzania have remained weak. Specifically, priority setting for the vulnerable groups including the elderly have been weak. We aimed to analyse the prospects and challenges of the priority setting process for the elderly health care services following the 1990s health sector reforms in Tanzania.

METHODS

We conducted an exploratory case study on priority setting process for the elderly healthcare services in Igunga and Nzega Tanzania. We carried out 24 Key Informant Interviews (KIIs) with the positions of District medical officers, social welfare, Medical Officers in-charge (MOI), planning officers and health system information focal person. Additionally, we carried out two focus group discussions (FGDs), one from each district with six participants from each group. Participants for the FGDs were MOI, health secretary, representative members of Health Facility Governing Committee (HFGC) and Council Health Management Team (CHMT). Data were analyzed using the qualitative content analysis.

RESULTS

Two categories emerged from the analysis of the transcripts. These were the prospects and challenges in priority setting for the elderly population under the decentralized health sector in rural Tanzania. The prospects included; the capacity of the LGAs on priority setting; existence of strategies used by LGAs; availability of teamwork spirit and the existence of guidelines for priority setting at LGAs. The challenges included difficulties of elderly identification, insufficient resources to implement the planned activities at the LGAs, unintegrated digitalized government health information tools or programs at the LGAs, interference of LGAs by the Central Government and low interest of stakeholders on elderly health care.

CONCLUSION

This study highlights the prospects and challenges facing priority setting for elderly care at the centralized health system in rural Tanzania. From the results the process is well organized but faces some challenges which if not addressed jeopardized and has potential to continue affecting the priority setting. Addressing the challenges highlighted requires joint efforts from both the elderly population in the community, healthcare providers and decision makers across all levels of the health system. This study serves as an eye-opener and calls for a bigger study to get a comprehensive picture of priority setting of the elderly health care in Tanzania.

Travelling numbers and broken loops: A qualitative systematic review on collecting and reporting maternal and neonatal health data in low-and lower-middle income countries

Data and indicator estimates are considered vital to document persisting challenges in maternal and newborn health and track progress towards global goals. However, prioritization of standardised, comparable quantitative data can preclude the collection of locally relevant information and pose overwhelming burdens in low-resource settings, with negative effects on the provision of quality of care. A growing body of qualitative studies aims to provide a place-based understanding of the complex processes and human experiences behind the generation and use of maternal and neonatal health data. We conducted a qualitative systematic review exploring how national or international requirements to collect and report data on maternal and neonatal health indicators are perceived and experienced at the sub-national and country level in low-income and lower-middle income countries. We systematically searched six electronic databases for qualitative and mixed-methods studies published between January 2000 and March 2023. Following screening of 4084 records by four reviewers, 47 publications were included in the review. Data were analysed thematically and synthesised from a Complex Adaptive Systems (CAS) theoretical perspective. Our findings show maternal and neonatal health data and indicators are not fixed, neutral entities, but rather outcomes of complex processes. Their collection and uptake is influenced by a multitude of system hardware elements (human resources, relevancy and adequacy of tools, infrastructure, and interoperability) and software elements (incentive systems, supervision and feedback, power and social relations, and accountability). When these components are aligned and sufficiently supportive, data and indicators can be used for positive system adaptivity through performance evaluation, prioritization, learning, and advocacy. Yet shortcomings and broken loops between system components can lead to unforeseen emergent behaviors such as blame, fear, and data manipulation. This review highlights the importance of measurement approaches that prioritize local relevance and feasibility, necessitating participatory approaches to define context-specific measurement objectives and strategies.

Use of implementation science to advance family planning programs in low- and middle-income countries: A systematic review

Objective

As environmental and economic pressures converge with demands to achieve sustainability development goals, low- and middle-income countries (LMIC) increasingly require strategies to strengthen and scale-up evidence-based practices (EBP) related to family planning (FP). Implementation science (IS) can help these efforts. The purpose of this article is to elucidate patterns in the use of IS in FP research and identify ways to maximize the potential of IS to advance FP in LMIC.

Design and methods

We conducted a systematic review that describes how IS concepts and principles have been operationalized in LMIC FP research published from 2007-2021. We searched six databases for implementation studies of LMIC FP interventions. Our review synthesizes the characteristics of implementation strategies and research efforts used to enhance the performance of FP-related EBP in these settings, identifying gaps, strengths and lessons learned.

Results

Four-hundred and seventy-two studies were eligible for full-text review. Ninety-two percent of studies were carried out in one region only, whereas 8 percent were multi-country studies that took place across multiple regions. 37 percent of studies were conducted in East Africa, 21 percent in West and Central Africa, 19 percent in Southern Africa and South Asia, respectively, and fewer than 5 percent in other Asian countries, Latin America and Middle East and North Africa, respectively. Fifty-four percent were on strategies that promoted individuals' uptake of FP. Far fewer were on strategies to enhance the coverage, implementation, spread or sustainability of FP programs. Most studies used quantitative methods only and evaluated user-level outcomes over implementation outcomes. Thirty percent measured processes and outcomes of strategies, 15 percent measured changes in implementation outcomes, and 31 percent report on the effect of contextual factors. Eighteen percent reported that they were situated within decision-making processes to address locally identified implementation issues. Fourteen percent of studies described measures to involve stakeholders in the research process. Only 7 percent of studies reported that implementation was led by LMIC delivery systems or implementation partners.

Conclusions

IS has potential to further advance LMIC FP programs, although its impact will be limited unless its concepts and principles are incorporated more systematically. To support this, stakeholders must focus on strategies that address a wider range of implementation outcomes; adapt research designs and blend methods to evaluate outcomes and processes; and establish collaborative research efforts across implementation, policy, and research domains. Doing so will expand opportunities for learning and applying new knowledge in pragmatic research paradigms where research is embedded in usual implementation conditions and addresses critical issues such as scale up and sustainability of evidence-informed FP interventions.Systematic Review Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier: CRD42020199353.

A Novel Approach to Promote Evidence-Based Development of District Maternal and Newborn Health Plans in Two States in India

Background:

Maternal and child health implementation plan development in districts of India lacks systematic process and capacity resulting in suboptimal health improvements. There is ineffective and limited participation and lack of autonomy to effect changes in district priorities.

Objectives:

Primary objective was to demonstrate a systematic planning approach to develop evidence-based district implementation plans for mothers and children.

Methods:

A planning tool named RAASTA (RMNCH + A Action Agenda using Strategic Approach for evidence-based district work plans) adapted from WHO (World Health Organization) program review tools was used in the states of Uttarakhand and Jharkhand. The tool was implemented in the two states for the development of implementation plans in a 6-step process by prioritizing district health goals; reviewing maternal, neonatal, child, and family planning intervention coverage; and linking them with activity implementation status; assessing strengths, and weaknesses of previous implementation plans and developing solutions based on current gaps in intervention coverage's.

Results:

Tool was used for capacity building of 59 participants and also identification of prioritized activities based on their available data. Several newer activities were identified. The districts mainstreamed them as action plans, many of which were incorporated in the state Program Implementation Plan for budgetary provisions under state NHM (National Health Mission) funds.

Conclusion:

The use of a tool facilitated the systematic development of evidence-based district implementation plans.

Systems on the Edge: Developing Organizational Theory for the Persistence of Mistreatment in Childbirth

Mistreatment in childbirth is institutionalized in many healthcare settings globally, causing widespread harm. Rising concern has elicited research on its prevalence and characteristics, with limited attention to developing explanatory theory. Mistreatment, a complex systemic and behavioral phenomenon, requires social science theory to explain its persistence despite official norms that promote respectful care. Diane Vaughan's normalization of organizational deviance theory from organizational sociology, emerged from studies of how things go wrong in organizations. Its multi-level framework provided an opportunity for analogical cross-case comparison to elaborate theory on mistreatment as normalized organizational deviance. To elaborate the theory, the Tanzanian public health system in the period of 2010-2015 was selected as a case. A broad Scopus search identified 4,068 articles published on the health system and maternal health in Tanzania of which 122 were selected. Data was extracted using a framework based on the theory and reviews of mistreatment in healthcare. Relationships and patterns emerged through comparative analysis across concepts and system levels and then were compared with Vaughan's theory and additional organizational theories. Analysis revealed that normalized scarcity at the macro-level combined with production pressures for biomedical care and imbalanced power-dependence altered values, structures, and processes in the health system. Meso-level actors struggled to achieve production goals with limited autonomy and resources, resulting in workarounds and informal rationing. Biomedical care was prioritized, and emotion work was rationed in provider interactions with women, which many women experienced as disrespect. Analogical comparison with another case of organizational deviance based on literature enabled a novel approach to elaborate theory. The emergent theory sheds light on opportunities to transform systems and routinize respectful care. Theory application in additional settings and exploration of other social theories is needed for further understanding of this complex problem.

Putting the local back into planning-experiences and perceptions of state and district health functionaries of seven aspirational districts in India on an innovative planning capacity building approach

District functionaries have ostensibly a major responsibility to develop evidence based plans. However, this responsibility is not commensurate with skills and expertise among functionaries in many Indian states. Vriddhi project-technical partner of the government, developed a planning tool for maternal and neonatal health programmes, called RMNCH + A Action Agenda using Strategic Approach (RAASTA), which was introduced in a workshop format in two states and attended by program officers. Qualitative feedback was obtained from selected participants to understand their experience of the workshop and of the planning tool. It emerged that previous planning process had little application of local evidence based solutions. Participants appreciated the alternative approach as RAASTA equipped them to use local evidence. Several action plans derived at the workshop were included in the state plan. At the same time, apprehension was expressed by participants about translating their learnings to practical application as planning was not a central priority in their scheme of duties and tasks. Enhanced support from states in refreshing district planners' skills would be an important step. One state government has scaled up the RAASTA tool while an electronic version is being developed for future use as it demonstrates great potential to equip and aid district officials in developing evidence based plans.

"There Is No Link Between Resource Allocation and Use of Local Data": A Qualitative Study of District-Based Health Decision-Making in West Bengal, India

BACKGROUND

Effective coordination among multiple departments, including data-sharing, is needed for sound decision-making for health services. India has a district planning process involving departments for local resource-allocation based on shared data. This study assesses the decision-making process at the district level, with a focus on the extent of local data-use for resource allocation for maternal and child health.

METHODS

Direct observations of key decision-making meetings and qualitative interviews with key informants were conducted in two districts in the State of West Bengal, India. Content analysis of the data maintained within the district health system was done to understand the types of data available and sharing mechanisms. This information was triangulated thematically based on WHO health system blocks.

RESULTS

There was no structured decision-making process and only limited inter-departmental data-sharing. Data on all 21 issues discussed in the district decision-making meetings observed were available within the information systems. Yet indicators for only nine issues-such as institutional delivery and immunisation services were discussed. Discussions about infrastructure and supplies were not supported by data, and planning targets were not linked to health outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Existing local data is highly under-used for decision-making at the district level. There is strong potential for better interaction between departments and better use of data for priority-setting, planning and follow-up.

Criteria Used for Priority-Setting for Public Health Resource Allocation in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVES

This systematic review aimed to identify criteria being used for priority setting for resource allocation decisions in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Furthermore, the included studies were analyzed from a policy perspective to understand priority setting processes in these countries.

METHODS

Searches were carried out in PubMed, Embase, Econlit, and Cochrane databases, supplemented with pre-identified Web sites and bibliographic searches of relevant papers. Quality appraisal of included studies was undertaken. The review protocol is registered in International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews PROSPERO CRD42017068371.

RESULTS

Of 16,412 records screened by title and abstract, 112 papers were identified for full text screening and 44 studies were included in the final analysis. At an overall level, cost-effectiveness 52 percent (n = 22) and health benefits 45 percent (n = 19) were the most cited criteria used for priority setting for public health resource allocation. Inter-region (LMICs) and between various approaches (like health technology assessment, multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA), accountability for reasonableness (AFR) variations among criteria were also noted. Our review found that MCDA approach was more frequently used in upper middle-income countries and AFR in lower-income countries for priority setting in health. Policy makers were the most frequently consulted stakeholders in all regions.

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Priority-setting criteria for health resource allocation decisions in LMICs largely comprised of cost-effectiveness and health benefits criteria at overall level. Other criteria like legal and regulatory framework conducive for implementation, fairness/ethics, and political considerations were infrequently reported and should be considered.

Priority setting for maternal, newborn and child health in Uganda: a qualitative study evaluating actual practice

Background

Despite continued investment, Maternal, Newborn and Child Health (MNCH) indicators in low and middle income countries have remained relatively poor. This could, in part, be explained by inadequate resources to adequately address these problems, inappropriate allocation of the available resources, or lack of implementation of the most effective interventions. Systematic priority setting and resource allocation could contribute to alleviating these limitations. There is a paucity of literature that follows through MNCH prioritization processes to implementation, making it difficult for policy makers to understand the impact of their decision-making on population health. The overall objective of this paper was to describe and evaluate priority setting for maternal, newborn and child health interventions in Uganda.

Methods

Fifty-four key informant interviews and a review of policies and media reports were used to describe priority setting for MNCH in Uganda. Kapiriri and Martin’s conceptual framework was used to evaluate priority setting for MNCH.

Results

There were three main prioritization exercises for maternal, newborn and child health in Uganda. The processes were participatory and were guided by explicit tools, evidence, and criteria, however, the public and the districts were insufficiently involved in the priority setting process. While there were conducive contextual factors including strong political support, implementation was constrained by the presence of competing actors, with varying priorities, an unequal allocation of resources between child health and maternal health interventions, limited financial and human resources, a weak health system and limited institutional capacity.

Conclusions

Stronger institutional capacity at the Ministry of Health and equitable engagement of key stakeholders in decision-making processes, especially the public, and implementers, would improve understanding, satisfaction and compliance with the priority setting process. Availability of financial and human resources that are appropriately allocated would facilitate the implementation of well-developed policies.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12913-019-4170-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Sustainability in Health care by Allocating Resources Effectively (SHARE) 11: reporting outcomes of an evidence-driven approach to disinvestment in a local healthcare setting

Background

This is the final paper in a thematic series reporting a program of Sustainability in Health care by Allocating Resources Effectively (SHARE) in a local healthcare setting. The SHARE Program was established to explore a systematic, integrated, evidence-based organisation-wide approach to disinvestment in a large Australian health service network. This paper summarises the findings, discusses the contribution of the SHARE Program to the body of knowledge and understanding of disinvestment in the local healthcare setting, and considers implications for policy, practice and research.

Discussion

The SHARE program was conducted in three phases. Phase One was undertaken to understand concepts and practices related to disinvestment and the implications for a local health service and, based on this information, to identify potential settings and methods for decision-making about disinvestment. The aim of Phase Two was to implement and evaluate the proposed methods to determine which were sustainable, effective and appropriate in a local health service. A review of the current literature incorporating the SHARE findings was conducted in Phase Three to contribute to the understanding of systematic approaches to disinvestment in the local healthcare context.

SHARE differed from many other published examples of disinvestment in several ways: by seeking to identify and implement disinvestment opportunities within organisational infrastructure rather than as standalone projects; considering disinvestment in the context of all resource allocation decisions rather than in isolation; including allocation of non-monetary resources as well as financial decisions; and focusing on effective use of limited resources to optimise healthcare outcomes.

Conclusion

The SHARE findings provide a rich source of new information about local health service decision-making, in a level of detail not previously reported, to inform others in similar situations. Multiple innovations related to disinvestment were found to be acceptable and feasible in the local setting. Factors influencing decision-making, implementation processes and final outcomes were identified; and methods for further exploration, or avoidance, in attempting disinvestment in this context are proposed based on these findings. The settings, frameworks, models, methods and tools arising from the SHARE findings have potential to enhance health care and patient outcomes.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12913-018-3172-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Rapid research and implementation priority setting for wound care uncertainties

INTRODUCTION

People with complex wounds are more likely to be elderly, living with multimorbidity and wound related symptoms. A variety of products are available for managing complex wounds and a range of healthcare professionals are involved in wound care, yet there is a lack of good evidence to guide practice and services. These factors create uncertainty for those who deliver and those who manage wound care. Formal priority setting for research and implementation topics is needed to more accurately target the gaps in treatment and services. We solicited practitioner and manager uncertainties in wound care and held a priority setting workshop to facilitate a collaborative approach to prioritising wound care-related uncertainties.

METHODS

We recruited healthcare professionals who regularly cared for patients with complex wounds, were wound care specialists or managed wound care services. Participants submitted up to five wound care uncertainties in consultation with their colleagues, via an on-line survey and attended a priority setting workshop. Submitted uncertainties were collated, sorted and categorised according professional group. On the day of the workshop, participants were divided into four groups depending on their profession. Uncertainties submitted by their professional group were viewed, discussed and amended, prior to the first of three individual voting rounds. Participants cast up to ten votes for the uncertainties they judged as being high priority. Continuing in the professional groups, the top 10 uncertainties from each group were displayed, and the process was repeated. Groups were then brought together for a plenary session in which the final priorities were individually scored on a scale of 0-10 by participants. Priorities were ranked and results presented. Nominal group technique was used for generating the final uncertainties, voting and discussions.

RESULTS

Thirty-three participants attended the workshop comprising; 10 specialist nurses, 10 district nurses, seven podiatrists and six managers. Participants had been qualified for a mean of 20.7 years with a mean of 16.8 years of wound care experience. One hundred and thirty-nine uncertainties were submitted electronically and a further 20 were identified on the day of the workshop following lively, interactive group discussions. Twenty-five uncertainties from the total of 159 generated made it to the final prioritised list. These included six of the 20 new uncertainties. The uncertainties varied in focus, but could be broadly categorised into three themes: service delivery and organisation, patient centred care and treatment options. Specialist nurses were more likely to vote for service delivery and organisation topics, podiatrists for patient centred topics, district nurses for treatment options and operational leads for a broad range.

CONCLUSIONS

This collaborative priority setting project is the first to engage front-line clinicians in prioritising research and implementation topics in wound care. We have shown that it is feasible to conduct topic prioritisation in a short time frame. This project has demonstrated that with careful planning and rigor, important questions that are raised in the course of clinicians' daily decision making can be translated into meaningful research and implementation initiatives that could make a difference to service delivery and patient care.

District decision-making for health in low-income settings: a systematic literature review

Health management information systems (HMIS) produce large amounts of data about health service provision and population health, and provide opportunities for data-based decision-making in decentralized health systems. Yet the data are little-used locally. A well-defined approach to district-level decision-making using health data would help better meet the needs of the local population. In this second of four papers on district decision-making for health in low-income settings, our aim was to explore ways in which district administrators and health managers in low- and lower-middle-income countries use health data to make decisions, to describe the decision-making tools they used and identify challenges encountered when using these tools. A systematic literature review, following PRISMA guidelines, was undertaken. Experts were consulted about key sources of information. A search strategy was developed for 14 online databases of peer reviewed and grey literature. The resources were screened independently by two reviewers using pre-defined inclusion criteria. The 14 papers included were assessed for the quality of reported evidence and a descriptive evidence synthesis of the review findings was undertaken. We found 12 examples of tools to assist district-level decision-making, all of which included two key stages—identification of priorities, and development of an action plan to address them. Of those tools with more steps, four included steps to review or monitor the action plan agreed, suggesting the use of HMIS data. In eight papers HMIS data were used for prioritization. Challenges to decision-making processes fell into three main categories: the availability and quality of health and health facility data; human dynamics and financial constraints. Our findings suggest that evidence is available about a limited range of processes that include the use of data for decision-making at district level. Standardization and pre-testing in diverse settings would increase the potential that these tools could be used more widely.

Sustainability in Health care by Allocating Resources Effectively (SHARE) 5: developing a model for evidence-driven resource allocation in a local healthcare setting

Background

This is the fifth in a series of papers reporting Sustainability in Health care by Allocating Resources Effectively (SHARE) in a local healthcare setting. This paper synthesises the findings from Phase One of the SHARE Program and presents a model to be implemented and evaluated in Phase Two. Monash Health, a large healthcare network in Melbourne Australia, sought to establish an organisation-wide systematic evidence-based program for disinvestment. In the absence of guidance from the literature, the Centre for Clinical Effectiveness, an in-house ‘Evidence Based Practice Support Unit’, was asked to explore concepts and practices related to disinvestment, consider the implications for a local health service and identify potential settings and methods for decision-making.

Methods

Mixed methods were used to capture the relevant information. These included literature reviews; online questionnaire, interviews and structured workshops with a range of stakeholders; and consultation with experts in disinvestment, health economics and health program evaluation. Using the principles of evidence-based change, the project team worked with health service staff, consumers and external experts to synthesise the findings from published literature and local research and develop proposals, frameworks and plans.

Results

Multiple influencing factors were extracted from these findings. The implications were both positive and negative and addressed aspects of the internal and external environments, human factors, empirical decision-making, and practical applications. These factors were considered in establishment of the new program; decisions reached through consultation with stakeholders were used to define four program components, their aims and objectives, relationships between components, principles that underpin the program, implementation and evaluation plans, and preconditions for success and sustainability. The components were Systems and processes, Disinvestment projects, Support services, and Program evaluation and research. A model for a systematic approach to evidence-based resource allocation in a local health service was developed.

Conclusion

A robust evidence-based investigation of the research literature and local knowledge with a range of stakeholders resulted in rich information with strong consistent messages. At the completion of Phase One, synthesis of the findings enabled development of frameworks and plans and all preconditions for exploration of the four main aims in Phase Two were met.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12913-017-2208-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Sustainability in health care by allocating resources effectively (SHARE) 3: examining how resource allocation decisions are made, implemented and evaluated in a local healthcare setting

Background

This is the third in a series of papers reporting a program of Sustainability in Health care by Allocating Resources Effectively (SHARE) in a local healthcare setting. Leaders in a large Australian health service planned to establish an organisation-wide, systematic, integrated, evidence-based approach to disinvestment. In order to introduce new systems and processes for disinvestment into existing decision-making infrastructure, we aimed to understand where, how and by whom resource allocation decisions were made, implemented and evaluated. We also sought the knowledge and experience of staff regarding previous disinvestment activities.

Methods

Structured interviews, workshops and document analysis were used to collect information from multiple sources in an environmental scan of decision-making systems and processes. Findings were synthesised using a theoretical framework.

Results

Sixty-eight respondents participated in interviews and workshops. Eight components in the process of resource allocation were identified: Governance, Administration, Stakeholder engagement, Resources, Decision-making, Implementation, Evaluation and, where appropriate, Reinvestment of savings. Elements of structure and practice for each component are described and a new framework was developed to capture the relationships between them. A range of decision-makers, decision-making settings, type and scope of decisions, criteria used, and strengths, weaknesses, barriers and enablers are outlined. The term ‘disinvestment’ was not used in health service decision-making. Previous projects that involved removal, reduction or restriction of current practices were driven by quality and safety issues, evidence-based practice or a need to find resource savings and not by initiatives where the primary aim was to disinvest. Measuring resource savings is difficult, in some situations impossible. Savings are often only theoretical as resources released may be utilised immediately by patients waiting for beds, clinic appointments or surgery. Decision-making systems and processes for resource allocation are more complex than assumed in previous studies.

Conclusion

There is a wide range of decision-makers, settings, scope and type of decisions, and criteria used for allocating resources within a single institution. To our knowledge, this is the first paper to report this level of detail and to introduce eight components of the resource allocation process identified within a local health service.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12913-017-2207-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

[Use of modern contraceptive methods in the Democratic Republic of the Congo: prevalence and barriers in the health zone of Dibindi, Mbuji-Mayi]

Introduction

l’objectif de cette étude était de déterminer la prévalence contraceptive moderne et les barrières à l’utilisation des méthodes contraceptives modernes chez les couples de la Zone de Santé Dibindi, à Mbuji-Mayi en République Démocratique du Congo.

Méthodes

de Mai à Juin 2015, nous avons réalisé une étude descriptive transversale. Nous avons inclus les femmes âgées de 15 à 49 ans, en union maritale, non enceinte au moment de l’enquête, qui habitaient la Zone de santé Dibindi depuis deux ans et ayant consenti librement de participer à l’étude. La collecte des données a été réalisée par interview libre des femmes. La prévalence contraceptive moderne se référait aux femmes en cours d’utilisation, au moment de l’enquête, des contraceptifs modernes. La comparaison des proportions a été réalisée au seuil de signification de 5%. Le test de Bonferroni a été utilisé pour comparer, deux à deux, les proportions des barrières à l’utilisation des contraceptifs modernes.

Résultats

la prévalence contraceptive moderne à Dibindi, en 2015, était de 18,4%. Elle était faible eu égard aux services de planification familiale disponibles dans cette Zone de santé. Plusieurs femmes refusaient d’utiliser les méthodes contraceptives modernes malgré l’information dont elles disposaient à cause de leur désir de maternité, l’interdiction religieuse, l’opposition du conjoint et la crainte des effets secondaires.

Conclusion

l’information suffisante et centrée sur chaque cliente ou son couple, sur la planification familiale, devrait être renforcée de façon à éliminer les fausses croyances, ce qui accroitrait l’utilisation des méthodes contraceptives modernes.

Balancing efficiency, equity and feasibility of HIV treatment in South Africa - development of programmatic guidance

South Africa, the country with the largest HIV epidemic worldwide, has been scaling up treatment since 2003 and is rapidly expanding its eligibility criteria. The HIV treatment programme has achieved significant results, and had 1.8 million people on treatment per 2011. Despite these achievements, it is now facing major concerns regarding (i) efficiency: alternative treatment policies may save more lives for the same budget; (ii) equity: there are large inequalities in who receives treatment; (iii) feasibility: still only 52% of the eligible population receives treatment.Hence, decisions on the design of the present HIV treatment programme in South Africa can be considered suboptimal. We argue there are two fundamental reasons to this. First, while there is a rapidly growing evidence-base to guide priority setting decisions on HIV treatment, its included studies typically consider only one criterion at a time and thus fail to capture the broad range of values that stakeholders have. Second, priority setting on HIV treatment is a highly political process but it seems no adequate participatory processes are in place to incorporate stakeholders' views and evidences of all sorts.We propose an alternative approach that provides a better evidence base and outlines a fair policy process to improve priority setting in HIV treatment. The approach integrates two increasingly important frameworks on health care priority setting: accountability for reasonableness (A4R) to foster procedural fairness, and multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) to construct an evidence-base on the feasibility, efficiency, and equity of programme options including trade-offs. The approach provides programmatic guidance on the choice of treatment strategies at various decisions levels based on a sound conceptual framework, and holds large potential to improve HIV priority setting in South Africa.

Impact of a decision-support tool on decision making at the district level in Kenya

BACKGROUND

In many countries, the responsibility for planning and delivery of health services is devolved to the subnational level. Health programs, however, often fall short of efficient use of data to inform decisions. As a result, programs are not as effective as they can be at meeting the health needs of the populations they serve. In Kenya, a decision-support tool, the District Health Profile (DHP) tool was developed to integrate data from health programs, primarily HIV, at the district level and to enable district health management teams to review and monitor program progress for specific health issues to make informed service delivery decisions.

METHODS

Thirteen in-depth interviews were conducted with ten tool users and three non-users in six districts to qualitatively assess the process of implementing the tool and its effect on data-informed decision making at the district level. The factors that affected use or non-use of the tool were also investigated. Respondents were selected via convenience sample from among those that had been trained to use the DHP tool except for one user who was self-taught to use the tool. Selection criteria also included respondents from urban districts with significant resources as well as respondents from more remote, under-resourced districts.

RESULTS

Findings from the in-depth interviews suggest that among those who used it, the DHP tool had a positive effect on data analysis, review, interpretation, and sharing at the district level. The automated function of the tool allowed for faster data sharing and immediate observation of trends that facilitated data-informed decision making. All respondents stated that the DHP tool assisted them to better target existing services in need of improvement and to plan future services, thus positively influencing program improvement.

CONCLUSIONS

This paper stresses the central role that a targeted decision-support tool can play in making data aggregation, analysis, and presentation easier and faster. The visual synthesis of data facilitates the use of information in health decision making at the district level of a health system and promotes program improvement. The experience in Kenya can be applied to other countries that face challenges making district-level, data-informed decisions with data from fragmented information systems.

Impact of a decision-support tool on decision making at the district level in Kenya

BACKGROUND

In many countries, the responsibility for planning and delivery of health services is devolved to the subnational level. Health programs, however, often fall short of efficient use of data to inform decisions. As a result, programs are not as effective as they can be at meeting the health needs of the populations they serve. In Kenya, a decision-support tool, the District Health Profile (DHP) tool was developed to integrate data from health programs, primarily HIV, at the district level and to enable district health management teams to review and monitor program progress for specific health issues to make informed service delivery decisions.

METHODS

Thirteen in-depth interviews were conducted with ten tool users and three non-users in six districts to qualitatively assess the process of implementing the tool and its effect on data-informed decision making at the district level. The factors that affected use or non-use of the tool were also investigated. Respondents were selected via convenience sample from among those that had been trained to use the DHP tool except for one user who was self-taught to use the tool. Selection criteria also included respondents from urban districts with significant resources as well as respondents from more remote, under-resourced districts.

RESULTS

Findings from the in-depth interviews suggest that among those who used it, the DHP tool had a positive effect on data analysis, review, interpretation, and sharing at the district level. The automated function of the tool allowed for faster data sharing and immediate observation of trends that facilitated data-informed decision making. All respondents stated that the DHP tool assisted them to better target existing services in need of improvement and to plan future services, thus positively influencing program improvement.

CONCLUSIONS

This paper stresses the central role that a targeted decision-support tool can play in making data aggregation, analysis, and presentation easier and faster. The visual synthesis of data facilitates the use of information in health decision making at the district level of a health system and promotes program improvement. The experience in Kenya can be applied to other countries that face challenges making district-level, data-informed decisions with data from fragmented information systems.