Validation of a questionnaire for Central nervous system Aspects of joint Pain: the CAP questionnaire.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Neuropathic-like pain, fatigue, cognitive difficulty, catastrophising, anxiety, sleep disturbance, depression, and widespread pain associate with a single factor in people with knee pain. We report the Central Aspects of Pain questionnaire (CAP) to characterise this across painful musculoskeletal conditions. METHODS: CAP was derived from the 8 item CAP-Knee questionnaire, and completed by participants with joint pain in the Investigating Musculoskeletal Health and Wellbeing survey. Subgroups had osteoarthritis, back pain or fibromyalgia. Acceptability was evaluated by feedback and data missingness. Correlation coefficients informed widespread pain scoring threshold in relation to the other items, and evaluated associations with pain. Factor analysis assessed CAP structure. Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC) between paper and electronic administration assessed reliability. Friedman test assessed score stability over 4 years in people reporting knee osteoarthritis. RESULTS: Data were from 3579 participants (58% female, median age; 71 years), including subgroups with osteoarthritis (n = 1158), back pain (n = 1292) or fibromyalgia (n = 177). Across the 3 subgroups, ≥10/26 painful sites on the manikin scored widespread pain. Reliability was high (ICC= 0.89 (95% CI: 0.84-0.92)) and CAP scores fit to 1 and 2 factor model, with a total CAP score that was associated with pain severity and quality (r = 0.50-0.72). In people with knee pain, CAP scores were stable over 4 years at the group level, but displayed significant temporal heterogeneity within individual participants. CONCLUSIONS: Central Aspects of Pain is reliably measured by the CAP questionnaire across a range of painful musculoskeletal conditions, and is a changeable state.

Factoring civil society actors into health policy processes in low- and middle-income countries: a review of research articles, 2007-16.

Civil society actors have substantially increased their participation in global and national health policymaking processes since the 1970s. Civil society roles in shaping such significant global health milestones as the Doha Declaration on Intellectual Property Rights, the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control and the recently adopted United Nations Sustainable Development Goals are well documented, but knowledge of civil society actor influence on health policy processes in low- and middle-income countries remains fragmented. This study analyses 24 peer-reviewed research articles published between 2007 and 2016 to identify factors affecting civil society influence in the pre-implementation stages of the policy process. The articles reviewed span 13 health issues and more than 50 countries in four regions of the world. This body of work focuses on civil society as represented by formal groups, primarily domestic and to some extent international non-governmental organizations, but also social movements, professional associations and faith-based organizations, among others. The studies document several actor-centred and contextual factors that affect civil society actor power, commonly across stages of the policy process. Crucially, civil society actors were challenged to impact the process in countries that lacked participative norms and governing structures. When repressive conditions existed, regime changes and donors sometimes helped to open doors to participation. The power of civil society actors was enhanced when they joined strong epistemic networks and broader coalitions of stakeholders, were resourced, and framed issues in ways that resonated with national policies and political priorities. The synthesis offers guidance to practitioners on factors to consider in strategy development and points to several issues for further investigation by health policy analysis scholars, including the implications of issue (non)adoption by civil society actors and contestation dynamics among those with differing perspectives.

The emergence and effectiveness of global health networks: findings and future research.

Global health issues vary in the amount of attention and resources they receive. One reason is that the networks of individuals and organizations that address these issues differ in their effectiveness. This article presents key findings from a research project on the emergence and effectiveness of global health networks addressing tobacco use, alcohol harm, maternal mortality, neonatal mortality, tuberculosis and pneumonia. Although networks are only one of many factors influencing priority, they do matter, particularly for shaping the way the problem and solutions are understood, and convincing governments, international organizations and other global actors to address the issue. Their national-level effects vary by issue and are more difficult to ascertain. Networks are most likely to produce effects when (1) their members construct a compelling framing of the issue, one that includes a shared understanding of the problem, a consensus on solutions and convincing reasons to act and (2) they build a political coalition that includes individuals and organizations beyond their traditional base in the health sector, a task that demands engagement in the politics of the issue, not just its technical aspects. Maintaining a focused frame and sustaining a broad coalition are often in tension: effective networks find ways to balance the two challenges. The emergence and effectiveness of a network are shaped both by its members' decisions and by contextual factors, including historical influences (e.g. prior failed attempts to address the problem), features of the policy environment (e.g. global development goals) and characteristics of the issue the network addresses (e.g. its mortality burden). Their proliferation raises the issue of their legitimacy. Reasons to consider them legitimate include their members' expertise and the attention they bring to neglected issues. Reasons to question their legitimacy include their largely elite composition and the fragmentation they bring to global health governance.

A framework on the emergence and effectiveness of global health networks.

Since 1990 mortality and morbidity decline has been more extensive for some conditions prevalent in low- and middle-income countries than for others. One reason may be differences in the effectiveness of global health networks, which have proliferated in recent years. Some may be more capable than others in attracting attention to a condition, in generating funding, in developing interventions and in convincing national governments to adopt policies. This article introduces a supplement on the emergence and effectiveness of global health networks. The supplement examines networks concerned with six global health problems: tuberculosis (TB), pneumonia, tobacco use, alcohol harm, maternal mortality and newborn deaths. This article presents a conceptual framework delineating factors that may shape why networks crystallize more easily surrounding some issues than others, and once formed, why some are better able than others to shape policy and public health outcomes. All supplement papers draw on this framework. The framework consists of 10 factors in three categories: (1) features of the networks and actors that comprise them, including leadership, governance arrangements, network composition and framing strategies; (2) conditions in the global policy environment, including potential allies and opponents, funding availability and global expectations concerning which issues should be prioritized; (3) and characteristics of the issue, including severity, tractability and affected groups. The article also explains the design of the project, which is grounded in comparison of networks surrounding three matched issues: TB and pneumonia, tobacco use and alcohol harm, and maternal and newborn survival. Despite similar burden and issue characteristics, there has been considerably greater policy traction for the first in each pair. The supplement articles aim to explain the role of networks in shaping these differences, and collectively represent the first comparative effort to understand the emergence and effectiveness of global health networks.

Catatonia in resource-limited settings: a case series and treatment protocol.

OBJECTIVE: The catatonic syndrome ("catatonia") is characterized by motor and motivation dysregulation and is associated with a number of neuropsychiatric and medical disorders. It is recognizable in a variety of clinical settings. We present observations from the treatment of four individuals with catatonia in Haiti and Rwanda and introduce a treatment protocol for use in resource-limited settings. METHODS: Four patients from rural Haiti and Rwanda with clinical signs of catatonia and a positive screen using the Bush-Francis Catatonia Rating Scale were treated collaboratively by general physicians and mental health clinicians with either lorazepam or diazepam. Success in treatment was clinically assessed by complete remittance of catatonia symptoms. RESULTS: The four patients in this report exhibited a range of characteristic and recognizable signs of catatonia, including immobility/stupor, stereotypic movements, echophenomena, posturing, odd mannerisms, mutism and refusal to eat or drink. All four cases presented initially to rural outpatient general health services in resource-limited settings. In some cases, diagnostic uncertainty initially led to treatment with typical antipsychotics. In each case, proper identification and treatment of catatonia with benzodiazepines led to significant clinical improvement. CONCLUSION: Catatonia can be effectively and inexpensively treated in resource-limited settings. Identification and management of catatonia are critical for the health and safety of patients with this syndrome. Familiarity with the clinical features of catatonia is essential for health professionals working in any setting. To facilitate early recognition of this treatable disorder, catatonia should feature more prominently in global mental health discourse.