Global changes to the chemotherapy service during the covid-19 pandemic.

PURPOSE: In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, changes to chemotherapy services were implemented as a means of managing imposed workload strains within health services and protecting patients from contracting COVID-19. Given the rapidly evolving nature of the pandemic many changes were rapidly adopted and were not substantiated by robust evidence. This study aimed to describe the changes adopted internationally to chemotherapy services, which may be used to guide future changes to treatment delivery. METHODS: A survey was developed to understand the impact of COVID-19 on the delivery of systemic anti-cancer therapies (SACT). It comprised 22 questions and examined the strategies implemented during the pandemic to prioritise and protect patients receiving SACT and the participants' professional opinion of the strategies employed. The survey was available in English, Spanish and French and was distributed via professional bodies. RESULTS: 129 responses were obtained from healthcare professionals working across 17 different countries. 45% of institutions had to implement treatment prioritisation strategies and all hospitals implemented changes in the delivery of treatment, including: reduction in treatments (69%), using less immunosuppressive agents (50%), allowing treatment breaks (14%) and switching to oral therapies (45%). Virtual clinic visits were perceived by participants as the most effective strategy to protect patients. CONCLUSIONS: The pandemic has forced chemotherapy healthcare professionals to adopt new ways of working by reducing health interactions. Many areas of research are needed following this period, including understanding patients' perceptions of risks to treatment, utilisation of oral treatments and the impact of treatment breaks on cancer outcomes.

Carrying Out Rapid Qualitative Research During a Pandemic: Emerging Lessons From COVID-19.

Social scientists have a robust history of contributing to better understandings of and responses to disease outbreaks. The implementation of qualitative research in the context of infectious epidemics, however, continues to lag behind in the delivery, credibility, and timeliness of findings when compared with other research designs. The purpose of this article is to reflect on our experience of carrying out three research studies (a rapid appraisal, a qualitative study based on interviews, and a mixed-methods survey) aimed at exploring health care delivery in the context of COVID-19. We highlight the importance of qualitative data to inform evidence-based public health responses and provide a way forward to global research teams who wish to implement similar rapid qualitative studies. We reflect on the challenges of setting up research teams, obtaining ethical approval, collecting and analyzing data in real-time and sharing actionable findings.

Factors shaping network emergence: A cross-country comparison of quality of care networks in Bangladesh, Ethiopia, Malawi, and Uganda.

The Quality-of-Care Network (QCN) was conceptualized by the World Health Organization (WHO) and other global partners to facilitate learning on and improve quality of care for maternal and newborn health within and across low and middle-income countries. However, there was significant variance in the speed and extent to which QCN formed in the involved countries. This paper investigates the factors that shaped QCN's differential emergence in Bangladesh, Ethiopia, Malawi, and Uganda. Drawing on network scholarship, we conducted a replicated case study of the four country cases and triangulated several sources of data, including a document review, observations of national-level and district level meetings, and key informant interviews in each country and at the global level. Thematic coding was performed in NVivo 12. We find that QCN emerged most quickly and robustly in Bangladesh, followed by Ethiopia, then Uganda, and slowest and with least institutionalization in Malawi. Factors connected to the policy environment and network features explained variance in network emergence. With respect to the policy environment, pre-existing resources and initiatives dedicated to maternal and newborn health and quality improvement, strong data and health system capacity, and national commitment to advancing on synergistic goals were crucial drivers to QCN's emergence. With respect to the features of the network itself, the embedding of QCN leadership in powerful agencies with pre-existing coordination structures and trusting relationships with key stakeholders, inclusive network membership, and effective individual national and local leadership were also crucial in explaining QCN's speed and quality of emergence across countries. Studying QCN emergence provides critical insights as to why well-intentioned top-down global health networks may not materialize in some country contexts and have relatively quick uptake in others, and has implications for a network's perceived legitimacy and ultimate effectiveness in producing stated objectives.

How to evaluate a multi-country implementation-focused network: Reflections from the Quality of Care Network (QCN) evaluation.

Learning about how to evaluate implementation-focused networks is important as they become more commonly used. This research evaluated the emergence, legitimacy and effectiveness of a multi-country Quality of Care Network (QCN) aiming to improve maternal, newborn and child health (MNCH) outcomes. We examined the QCN global level, national and local level interfaces in four case study countries. This paper presents the evaluation team's reflections on this 3.5 year multi-country, multi-disciplinary project. Specifically, we examine our approach, methodological innovations, lessons learned and recommendations for conducting similar research. We used a reflective methodological approach to draw lessons on our practice while evaluating the QCN. A 'reflections' tool was developed to guide the process, which happened within a period of 2-4 weeks across the different countries. All country research teams held focused 'reflection' meetings to discuss questions in the tool before sharing responses with this paper's lead author. Similarly, the different lead authors of all eight QCN papers convened their writing teams to reflect on the process and share key highlights. These data were thematically analysed and are presented across key themes around the implementation experience including what went well, facilitators and critical methodological adaptations, what can be done better and recommendations for undertaking similar work. Success drivers included the team's global nature, spread across seven countries with members affiliated to nine institutions. It was multi-level in expertise and seniority and highly multidisciplinary including experts in medicine, policy and health systems, implementation research, behavioural sciences and MNCH. Country Advisory Boards provided technical oversight and support. Despite complexities, the team effectively implemented the QCN evaluation. Strong leadership, partnership, communication and coordination were key; as were balancing standardization with in-country adaptation, co-production, flattening hierarchies among study team members and the iterative nature of data collection. Methodological adaptations included leveraging technology which became essential during COVID-19, clear division of roles and responsibilities, and embedding capacity building as both an evaluation process and outcome, and optimizing technology use for team cohesion and quality outputs.

Evaluating theory of change to improve the functioning of the network for improving quality of care for maternal, newborn and child health.

In 2017, WHO and global partners launched 'The Network for Improving Quality of Care for Maternal, Newborn and Child Health' (QCN) seeking to reduce in-facility maternal and newborn deaths and stillbirth by 50% in health facilities by 2022. We explored how the QCN theory of change guided what actually happened over 2018-2022 in order to understand what worked well, what did not, and to ultimately describe the consequences of QCN activities. We applied theory of change analysis criteria to investigate how well-defined, plausible, coherent and measurable the results were, how well-defined, coherent, justifiable, realistic, sustainable and measurable the assumptions were, and how independent and sufficient the causal links were. We found that the QCN theory of change was not used in the same way across implementing countries. While the theory stipulated Leadership, Action, Learning and Accountability as the principle to guide network activity implementation other principles and varying quality improvement methods have also been used; key conditions were missing at service integration and process levels in the global theory of change for the network. Conditions such as lack of physical resources were frequently reported to be preventing adequate care, or harm patient satisfaction. Key partners and implementers were not introduced to the network theory of change early enough for them to raise critical questions about their roles and the need for, and nature of, quality of care interventions. Whilst the theory of change was created at the outset of QCN it is not clear how much it guided actual activities or any monitoring and evaluation as things progressed. Enabling countries to develop their theory of change, perhaps guided by the global framework, could improve stakeholder engagement, allow local evaluation of assumptions and addressing of challenges, and better target QCN work toward achieving its goals.

Effectiveness of a multi-country implementation-focused network on quality of care: Delivery of interventions and processes for improved maternal, newborn and child health outcomes.

The Network for Improving Quality of Care for Maternal, Newborn and Child Health (QCN) aims to work through learning, action, leadership and accountability. We aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of QCN in these four areas at the global level and in four QCN countries: Bangladesh, Ethiopia, Malawi and Uganda. This mixed method evaluation comprised 2-4 iterative rounds of data collection between 2019-2022, involving stakeholder interviews, hospital observations, QCN members survey, and document review. Qualitative data was analysed using a coding framework developed from underlying theories on network effectiveness, behaviour change, and QCN proposed theory of change. Survey data capturing respondents' perception of QCN was analysed with descriptive statistics. The QCN global level, led by the WHO secretariat, was effective in bringing together network countries' governments and global actors via providing online and in-person platforms for communication and learning. In-country, various interventions were delivered in 'learning districts', however often separately by different partners in different locations, and pandemic-disrupted. Governance structures for quality of care were set-up, some preceding QCN, and were found to be stronger and better (though often externally) resourced at national than local levels. Awareness of operational plans and network activities differed between countries, was lower at local than national levels, but increased from 2019 to 2022. Engagement with, and value of, QCN was perceived to be higher in Uganda and Bangladesh than in Malawi or Ethiopia. Capacity building efforts were implemented in all countries-yet often dependent on implementing partners and donors. QCN stakeholders agreed 15 core monitoring indicators though data collection was challenging, especially for indicators requiring new or parallel systems. Accountability initiatives remained nascent in 2022. Global and national leadership elements of QCN have been most effective to date, with action, learning and accountability more challenging, partner or donor dependent, remaining to be scaled-up, and pandemic-disrupted.

Effect of a participatory whole-systems approach on mortality in children younger than 5 years in Jigawa state, Nigeria (INSPIRING trial): a community-based, parallel-arm, pragmatic, cluster randomised controlled trial and concurrent mixed-methods process evaluation.

BACKGROUND: In 2019, Nigeria reported the highest mortality rate in children younger than 5 years globally. We aimed to assess a whole-systems approach to improving child mortality in northern Nigeria. METHODS: We conducted a community-based, parallel-arm, pragmatic, cluster randomised controlled trial in Kiyawa local government area, Jigawa state, Nigeria, and a concurrent mixed-methods process evaluation using ethnography and quantitative implementation monitoring. Trial clusters were population catchment areas of 32 government primary health-care facilities. Compounds were randomly sampled, proportional to cluster size, and all women aged 16-49 years and children younger than 5 years who were permanent residents were eligible for inclusion and recruited as the evaluation population. Children younger than 7 days were recruited but excluded from analysis. Evaluation clusters were allocated to intervention or control via simple randomisation with a 1:1 ratio. Cluster names were written on paper, folded, and placed in a container by community representatives. Different community representatives took out names one by one, with the first half assigned to receive the intervention. The intervention consisted of three components: participatory learning and action (PLA) groups for men and women (including compound heads [ie, the member of the compound that residents deemed most senior]), partnership defined quality scorecard (PDQS), and health-care worker capacity building; it was delivered from March 1, 2021, to Dec 31, 2022. We could not mask participants, field staff, or intervention-delivery staff to cluster allocation but baseline, endline, and follow-up data excluded information on cluster allocation. PLA groups involved separate groups of up to 25 men or women from all villages in the intervention clusters. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality in children aged 7 days to 59 months between Oct 1, 2021, and Sept 20, 2022, referred to as the evaluation period. The trial was prospectively registered (ISRCTN 39213655) and the protocol has been published. FINDINGS: We recruited 3800 compounds at baseline, with 12 893 children contributing to analysis of the primary outcome (7316 [56·8%] of 12 893 in the intervention group and 5577 [43·3%] in the control group). 6617 (51·3%) of 12 893 children were male, 6275 (48·7%) were female, and one (<0·1%) child had missing sex data. Sampled compounds randomly came from 388 (91·3%) of 425 villages in the 32 clusters. We conducted verbal autopsies for 1182 deaths, of which 369 (31·2%) were children aged 7 days to 59 months during the evaluation period. Of these 369, 91 (24·7%) were classified as pneumonia deaths. Children contributed a median 361 days (IQR 236-365) to the analysis, with 369 (2·9%) of 12 893 children censored on their date of death, 1545 (12·0%) on their 5th birthday, and 3392 (26·3%) on the date of the most recent follow-up in which their residence or survival status was known. We found no significant decrease in all-cause mortality (hazard ratio 0·95, 95% CI 0·68-1·33; p=0·79) or suspected pneumonia mortality (0·79, 0·43-1·46; p=0·46) in the intervention group. The process evaluation showed low coverage and issues in reach of the intervention, but qualitative data highlighted mechanisms for positive effects on health and relationships. INTERPRETATION: Our intervention did not affect mortality. However, due to the high child mortality in this region, further efforts should be made to adapt our participatory whole-systems approach to use communities of action within compounds. FUNDING: GSK and Save the Children UK. TRANSLATION: For the Hausa translation of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.

"We don't trust all data coming from all facilities": factors influencing the quality of care network data quality in Ethiopia.

BACKGROUND: Good quality data are a key to quality health care. In 2017, WHO has launched the Quality of Care Network (QCN) to reduce maternal, newborn and stillbirth mortality via learning and sharing networks. Guided by the principle of equity and dignity, the network members agreed to implement the programme in 2017-2021. OBJECTIVE: This paper seeks to explore how QCN has contributed to improving data quality and to identify factors influencing quality of data in Ethiopia. METHODS: We conducted a qualitative study in selected QCN facilities in Ethiopia using key informant interview and observation methods. We interviewed 40 people at national, sub-national and facility levels. Non-participant observations were carried out in four purposively selected health facilities; we accessed monthly reports from 41 QCN learning facilities. A codebook was prepared following a deductive and inductive analytical approach, coded using Nvivo 12 and thematically analysed. RESULTS: There was a general perception that QCN had improved health data documentation and use in the learning facilities, achieved through coaching, learning and building from pre-existing initiatives. QCN also enhanced the data elements available by introducing a broader set of quality indicators. However, the perception of poor data quality persisted. Factors negatively affecting data quality included a lack of integration of QCN data within routine health system activities, the perception that QCN was a pilot, plus a lack of inclusive engagement at different levels. Both individual and system capabilities needed to be strengthened. CONCLUSION: There is evidence of QCN's contribution to improving data awareness. But a lack of inclusive engagement of actors, alignment and limited skill for data collection and analysis continued to affect data quality and use. In the absence of new resources, integration of new data activities within existing routine health information systems emerged as the most important potential action for positive change.

Individual, organizational and system circumstances, and the functioning of a multi-country implementation-focused network for maternal, newborn and child health: Bangladesh, Ethiopia, Malawi, and Uganda.

Better policies, investments, and programs are needed to improve the integration and quality of maternal, newborn, and child health services. Previously, partnerships and collaborations that involved multiple countries with a unified aim have been observed to yield positive results. Since 2017, the WHO and partners have hosted the Quality of Care Network [QCN], a multi-country implementation network focused on improving maternal, neonatal, and child health care. In this paper, we examine the functionality of QCN in different contexts. We focus on implementation circumstances and contexts in four network countries: Bangladesh, Ethiopia, Malawi, and Uganda. In each country, the study was conducted over several consecutive rounds between 2019-2022, employing 227 key informant interviews with major stakeholders and members of the network countries, and 42 facility observations. The collected data were coded using Nvivo-12 software and categorized thematically. The study showed that individual, organizational and system-level circumstances all played an important role in shaping implementation success in network countries, but that these levels were inter-linked. Systems that enabled leadership, motivated and trained staff, and created a positive culture of data use were critical for policy-making including addressing financing issues-to the day-to-day practice improvement at the front line. Some characteristics of QCN actively supported this, for example, shared learning forums for continuous learning, a focus on data and tracking progress, and emphasising the importance of coordinated efforts towards a common goal. However, inadequate system financing and capacity also hampered network functioning, especially in the face of external shocks.

Individual interactions in a multi-country implementation-focused quality of care network for maternal, newborn and child health: A social network analysis.

The Network for Improving Quality of Care for Maternal, Newborn and Child Health (QCN) was established to build a cross-country platform for joint-learning around quality improvement implementation approaches to reduce mortality. This paper describes and explores the structure of the QCN in four countries and at global level. Using Social Network Analysis (SNA), this cross-sectional study maps the QCN networks at global level and in four countries (Bangladesh, Ethiopia, Malawi and Uganda) and assesses the interactions among actors involved. A pre-tested closed-ended structured questionnaire was completed by 303 key actors in early 2022 following purposeful and snowballing sampling. Data were entered into an online survey tool, and exported into Microsoft Excel for data management and analysis. This study received ethical approval as part of a broader evaluation. The SNA identified 566 actors across the four countries and at global level. Bangladesh, Malawi and Uganda had multiple-hub networks signifying multiple clusters of actors reflecting facility or district networks, whereas the network in Ethiopia and at global level had more centralized networks. There were some common features across the country networks, such as low overall density of the network, engagement of actors at all levels of the system, membership of related committees identified as the primary role of actors, and interactions spanning all types (learning, action and information sharing). The most connected actors were facility level actors in all countries except Ethiopia, which had mostly national level actors. The results reveal the uniqueness and complexity of each network assessed in the evaluation. They also affirm the broader qualitative evaluation assessing the nature of these networks, including composition and leadership. Gaps in communication between members of the network and limited interactions of actors between countries and with global level actors signal opportunities to strengthen QCN.

Opportunities to sustain a multi-country quality of care network: Lessons on the actions of four countries Bangladesh, Ethiopia, Malawi, and Uganda.

The Quality of Care Network (QCN) is a global initiative that was established in 2017 under the leadership of WHO in 11 low-and- middle income countries to improve maternal, newborn, and child health. The vision was that the Quality of Care Network would be embedded within member countries and continued beyond the initial implementation period: that the Network would be sustained. This paper investigated the experience of actions taken to sustain QCN in four Network countries (Bangladesh, Ethiopia, Malawi, and Uganda) and reports on lessons learned. Multiple iterative rounds of data collection were conducted through qualitative interviews with global and national stakeholders, and non-participatory observation of health facilities and meetings. A total of 241 interviews, 42 facility and four meeting observations were carried out. We conducted a thematic analysis of all data using a framework approach that defined six critical actions that can be taken to promote sustainability. The analysis revealed that these critical actions were present with varying degrees in each of the four countries. Although vulnerabilities were observed, there was good evidence to support that actions were taken to institutionalize the innovation within the health system, to motivate micro-level actors, plan opportunities for reflection and adaptation from the outset, and to support strong government ownership. Two actions were largely absent and weakened confidence in future sustainability: managing financial uncertainties and fostering community ownership. Evidence from four countries suggested that the QCN model would not be sustained in its original format, largely because of financial vulnerability and insufficient time to embed the innovation at the sub-national level. But especially the efforts made to institutionalize the innovation in existing systems meant that some characteristics of QCN may be carried forward within broader government quality improvement initiatives.

Influences on policy-formulation, decision-making, organisation and management for maternal, newborn and child health in Bangladesh, Ethiopia, Malawi and Uganda: The roles and legitimacy of a multi-country network.

The Network for Improving Quality of Care for Maternal, Newborn and Child Health (QCN) is intended to facilitate learning, action, leadership and accountability for improving quality of care in member countries. This requires legitimacy-a network's right to exert power within national contexts. This is reflected, for example, in a government's buy-in and perceived ownership of the work of the network. During 2019-2022 we conducted iterative rounds of stakeholder interviews, observations of meetings, document review, and hospital observations in Bangladesh, Ethiopia, Malawi, Uganda and at the global level. We developed a framework drawing on three models: Tallberg and Zurn which conceptualizes legitimacy of international organisations dependent on their features, the legitimation process and beliefs of audiences; Nasiritousi and Faber, which looks at legitimacy in terms of problem, purpose, procedure, and performance of institutions; Sanderink and Nasiritousi, to characterize networks in terms of political, normative and cognitive interactions. We used thematic analysis to characterize, compare and contrast institutional interactions in a cross-case synthesis to determine salient features. Political and normative interactions were favourable within and between countries and at global level since collective decisions, collaborative efforts, and commitment to QCN goals were observed at all levels. Sharing resources and common principles were not common between network countries, indicating limits of the network. Cognitive interactions-those related to information sharing and transfer of ideas-were more challenging, with the bi-directional transfer, synthesis and harmonization of concepts and methods, being largely absent among and within countries. These may be required for increasing government ownership of QCN work, the embeddedness of the network, and its legitimacy. While we find evidence supporting the legitimacy of QCN from the perspective of country governments, further work and time are required for governments to own and embed the work of QCN in routine care.

Frontline healthcare workers' experiences with personal protective equipment during the COVID-19 pandemic in the UK: a rapid qualitative appraisal.

OBJECTIVES: To report frontline healthcare workers' (HCWs) experiences with personal protective equipment (PPE) during the COVID-19 pandemic in the UK. To understand HCWs' fears and concerns surrounding PPE, their experiences following its guidance and how these affected their perceived ability to deliver care during the COVID-19 pandemic. DESIGN: A rapid qualitative appraisal study combining three sources of data: semistructured in-depth telephone interviews with frontline HCWs (n=46), media reports (n=39 newspaper articles and 145 000 social media posts) and government PPE policies (n=25). PARTICIPANTS: Interview participants were HCWs purposively sampled from critical care, emergency and respiratory departments as well as redeployed HCWs from primary, secondary and tertiary care centres across the UK. RESULTS: A major concern was running out of PPE, putting HCWs and patients at risk of infection. Following national level guidance was often not feasible when there were shortages, leading to reuse and improvisation of PPE. Frequently changing guidelines generated confusion and distrust. PPE was reserved for high-risk secondary care settings and this translated into HCWs outside these settings feeling inadequately protected. Participants were concerned about differential access to adequate PPE, particularly for women and Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic HCWs. Participants continued delivering care despite the physical discomfort, practical problems and communication barriers associated with PPE use. CONCLUSION: This study found that frontline HCWs persisted in caring for their patients despite multiple challenges including inappropriate provision of PPE, inadequate training and inconsistent guidance. In order to effectively care for patients during the COVID-19 pandemic, frontline HCWs need appropriate provision of PPE, training in its use as well as comprehensive and consistent guidance. These needs must be addressed in order to protect the health and well-being of the most valuable healthcare resource in the COVID-19 pandemic: our HCWs.

Mental health and well-being of healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic in the UK: contrasting guidelines with experiences in practice.

BACKGROUND: Substantial evidence has highlighted the importance of considering the mental health of healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic, and several organisations have issued guidelines with recommendations. However, the definition of well-being and the evidence base behind such guidelines remain unclear. AIMS: The aims of the study are to assess the applicability of well-being guidelines in practice, identify unaddressed healthcare workers' needs and provide recommendations for supporting front-line staff during the current and future pandemics. METHOD: This paper discusses the findings of a qualitative study based on interviews with front-line healthcare workers in the UK (n = 33), and examines them in relation to a rapid review of well-being guidelines developed in response to the COVID-19 pandemic (n = 14). RESULTS: The guidelines placed greater emphasis on individual mental health and psychological support, whereas healthcare workers placed greater emphasis on structural conditions at work, responsibilities outside the hospital and the invaluable support of the community. The well-being support interventions proposed in the guidelines did not always respond to the lived experiences of staff, as some reported not being able to participate in these interventions because of understaffing, exhaustion or clashing schedules. CONCLUSIONS: Healthcare workers expressed well-being needs that aligned with socio-ecological conceptualisations of well-being related to quality of life. This approach to well-being has been highlighted in literature on support of healthcare workers in previous health emergencies, but it has not been monitored during this pandemic. Well-being guidelines should explore the needs of healthcare workers, and contextual characteristics affecting the implementation of recommendations.

Perceptions and experiences of healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic in the UK.

OBJECTIVE: The COVID-19 pandemic has set unprecedented demand on the healthcare workforce around the world. The UK has been one of the most affected countries in Europe. The aim of this study was to explore the perceptions and experiences of healthcare workers (HCWs) in relation to COVID-19 and care delivery models implemented to deal with the pandemic in the UK. METHODS: The study was designed as a rapid appraisal combining: (1) a review of UK healthcare policies (n=35 policies), (2) mass media and social media analysis of front-line staff experiences and perceptions (n=101 newspaper articles, n=1 46 000 posts) and (3) in-depth (telephone) interviews with front-line staff (n=30 interviews). The findings from all streams were analysed using framework analysis. RESULTS: Limited personal protective equipment (PPE) and lack of routine testing created anxiety and distress and had a tangible impact on the workforce. When PPE was available, incorrect size and overheating complicated routine work. Lack of training for redeployed staff and the failure to consider the skills of redeployed staff for new areas were identified as problems. Positive aspects of daily work reported by HCWs included solidarity between colleagues, the establishment of well-being support structures and feeling valued by society. CONCLUSION: Our study highlighted the importance of taking into consideration the experiences and concerns of front-line staff during a pandemic. Staff working in the UK during the COVID-19 pandemic advocated clear and consistent guidelines, streamlined testing of HCWs, administration of PPE and acknowledgement of the effects of PPE on routine practice.

Involving the public in decision-making about large-scale changes to health services: A scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Public involvement in large-scale changes (LSC) to health services is strongly promoted - and even mandated - in several health systems. This scoping review aimed to describe the evidence about how public involvement is conceptualised and conducted in LSC, with what impact, and how different stakeholders perceived this process. METHODS: After searching eight databases, 34 publications were included. Data were extracted and charted using a standardised form. Findings from the literature were discussed with frontline stakeholders. RESULTS: Public involvement remains poorly defined and its aims lack clarity in LSC. Public meetings are most often used to gather public views but raise the issue of representativeness. However, evidence in the literature is scarce about which involvement methods - informative and deliberative - are appropriate for the different stages of the LSC and with what impact. In several cases, the involved public felt they had no influence on decision-making regarding LSC proposals, sometimes leading to an environment of mistrust. In those instances, the public understood the technical arguments for change and actively questioned them, opposed LSC plans and sought alternative routes to voice their views. CONCLUSION: More research and consideration are needed regarding who should be involved, with what purpose and how. We argue that in practice two models of involvement, invited and uninvited participation, coexist and therefore interactions between the two should be given further consideration in LSC.

Improving postpartum care delivery and uptake by implementing context-specific interventions in four countries in Africa: a realist evaluation of the Missed Opportunities in Maternal and Infant Health (MOMI) project.

Postpartum care (PPC) has remained relatively neglected in many interventions designed to improve maternal and neonatal health in sub-Saharan Africa. The Missed Opportunities in Maternal and Infant Health project developed and implemented a context-specific package of health system strengthening and demand generation in four African countries, aiming to improve access and quality of PPC. A realist evaluation was conducted to enable nuanced understanding of the influence of different contextual factors on both the implementation and impacts of the interventions. Mixed methods were used to collect data and test hypothesised context-mechanism-outcome configurations: 16 case studies (including interviews, observations, monitoring data on key healthcare processes and outcomes), monitoring data for all study health facilities and communities, document analysis and participatory evaluation workshops. After evaluation in individual countries, a cross-country analysis was conducted that led to the development of four middle-range theories. Community health workers (CHWs) were key assets in shifting demand for PPC by 'bridging' communities and facilities. Because they were chosen from the community they served, they gained trust from the community and an intrinsic sense of responsibility. Furthermore, if a critical mass of women seek postpartum healthcare as a result of the CHWs bridging function, a 'buzz' for change is created, leading eventually to the acceptability and perceived value of attending for PPC that outweighs the costs of attending the health facility. On the supply side, rigid vertical hierarchies and defined roles for health facility workers (HFWs) impede integration of maternal and infant health services. Additionally, HFWs fear being judged negatively which overrides the self-efficacy that could potentially be gained from PPC training. Instead the main driver of HFWs' motivation to provide comprehensive PPC is dependent on accountability systems for delivering PPC created by other programmes. The realist evaluation offers insights into some of the contextual factors that can be pivotal in enabling the community-level and service-level interventions to be effective.

Challenges to successful implementation of HIV and AIDS-related health policies in Cartagena, Colombia.

The Caribbean region presents the highest prevalence of HIV/AIDS worldwide after sub-Saharan Africa; leading to serious social, economic and health consequences at the local scale but also at the regional and global levels. In Colombia, a national plan to tackle the epidemic was formulated with little evidence that its implementation in the local context is effective. This study focused on Cartagena - one of Colombia's largest cities and an international touristic hub - that presents one of the highest HIV prevalences in the country, to investigate whether the national plan accounts for local specificities and what are the barriers to local implementation. Based on the Contextual Interaction Theory (CIT), this qualitative research relied upon 27 interviews and 13 life stories of local inhabitants and stakeholders, collected in a first fieldwork in 2006-2007. A follow-up data collection took place in 2013 with 10 participants: key policymakers and implementers, NGO representatives and local inhabitants. Barriers identified by the participants included: local population's understandings and beliefs on condom use; stigma and discrimination; lack of collaboration from the Church, the education sector and local politicians; corruption; high staff turnover; frequent changes in leadership; lack of economic and human resources; and barriers to health care access. The findings suggest that global influences also have an impact on the CIT framework (e.g. international organisations as a major financier in HIV prevention). The participants put forward several feasible solutions to implementation barriers. We discuss how several of the proposed solutions have been applied in other Latin American and Caribbean countries and yielded positive results. However, further research is needed to find possible ways of overcoming certain barriers identified by this study such as corruption, the lack of collaboration of the Church and barriers to health care access.