加强复杂卫生系统中的循证决策:多地点协作方法的经验教训。
Enhancing evidence informed policymaking in complex health systems: lessons from multi-site collaborative approaches.
作者信息
Langlois Etienne V, Becerril Montekio Victor, Young Taryn, Song Kayla, Alcalde-Rabanal Jacqueline, Tran Nhan
机构信息
Alliance for Health Policy and Systems Research, World Health Organization, 20 avenue Appia, 1211, Geneva, Switzerland.
Center for Health Systems Research, National Institute of Public Health - Instituto Nacional de Salud Pública, Av. Universidad No. 655 Colonia Santa María Ahuacatitlán Cerrada Los Pinos y Caminera C.P., 62100, Cuernavaca, Morelos, Mexico.
出版信息
Health Res Policy Syst. 2016 Mar 17;14:20. doi: 10.1186/s12961-016-0089-0.
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.
背景
全球范围内,人们越来越关注确保基于证据的卫生政策制定,以此作为改善卫生系统绩效的一种手段。需要让政策制定者采用协作方式,以便在现实环境中生成和利用知识。为填补这一空白,我们基于研究人员与政策制定者/实施者之间的反复交流实施了两项干预措施。本文旨在反思在资源匮乏环境中实施的这些多地点证据转化为政策方法的实施情况和影响。
方法
第一种方法在墨西哥和尼加拉瓜实施,重点是由孕产妇健康利益相关者中的实践社区(CoP)推动实施研究。我们对实践社区进行了过程评估,并评估了专业人员获取、分析、调整和应用研究的能力。第二种方法称为“通过互动和提升技能在决策中构建政策对证据的需求”(Policy BUDDIES),在南非和喀麦隆实施。该干预措施提出了一个“结对”过程,以增强地方一级政策制定者对系统评价的需求和使用。Policy BUDDIES倡议采用混合方法现实主义评价设计进行评估。
结果
在墨西哥,由实践社区支持的实施研究促使当地卫生组织对孕产妇保健项目的质量进行监测。参与墨西哥和尼加拉瓜实践社区的卫生项目人员报告称,他们在识别和利用证据解决实施问题方面的能力有所提高。在南非,Policy BUDDIES为包括艾滋病毒和非传染性疾病在内的慢性病药物依从性政策框架提供了信息。参与结对过程的政策制定者报告称,他们对研究价值的认识有所提高,对与政策相关知识的需求也更大。
结论
协作性的证据转化为政策方法强调了研究人员与政策制定者/项目管理人员互动中反复迭代和连续性的重要性,以便适应卫生政策规划和实施中的快速演变。在制定和支持证据转化为政策的干预措施时,应适当考虑适用的方法,因为政策制定周期中的不同需求需要适应性的过程和知识。应更多地考虑将研究应用嵌入现实世界政策制定的方法,这种方法更适合卫生系统复杂的适应性特点。