Implementing lung health interventions in low- and middle-income countries: a FRESH AIR systematic review and meta-synthesis.

The vast majority of patients with chronic respiratory disease live in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Paradoxically, relevant interventions often fail to be effective particularly in these settings, as LMICs lack solid evidence on how to implement interventions successfully. Therefore, we aimed to identify factors critical to the implementation of lung health interventions in LMICs, and weigh their level of evidence.This systematic review followed Cochrane methodology and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) reporting standards. We searched eight databases without date or language restrictions in July 2019, and included all relevant original, peer-reviewed articles. Two researchers independently selected articles, critically appraised them (using Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP)/Meta Quality Appraisal Tool (MetaQAT)), extracted data, coded factors (following the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR)), and assigned levels of confidence in the factors (via Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation-Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative research (GRADE-CERQual)). We meta-synthesised levels of evidence of the factors based on their frequency and the assigned level of confidence (PROSPERO:CRD42018088687).We included 37 articles out of 9111 screened. Studies were performed across the globe in a broad range of settings. Factors identified with a high level of evidence were: 1) "Understanding needs of local users"; 2) ensuring "Compatibility" of interventions with local contexts (cultures, infrastructures); 3) identifying influential stakeholders and applying "Engagement" strategies; 4) ensuring adequate "Access to knowledge and information"; and 5) addressing "Resource availability". All implementation factors and their level of evidence were synthesised in an implementation tool.To conclude, this study identified implementation factors for lung health interventions in LMICs, weighed their level of evidence, and integrated the results into an implementation tool for practice. Policymakers, non-governmental organisations, practitioners, and researchers may use this FRESH AIR (Free Respiratory Evaluation and Smoke-exposure reduction by primary Health cAre Integrated gRoups) Implementation tool to develop evidence-based implementation strategies for related interventions. This could increase interventions' implementation success, thereby optimising the use of already-scarce resources and improving health outcomes.

The FRESHAIR4Life study: Global implementation research on non-communicable disease prevention targeting adolescents' exposure to tobacco and air pollution in disadvantaged populations.

The FRESHAIR4Life study aims to reduce the non-communicable disease (NCD) burden by implementing preventive interventions targeting adolescents' exposure to tobacco use and air pollution (AP) worldwide. This paper presents the FRESHAIR4Life methodology and initial rapid review results. The rapid review, using various databases and PubMed, aimed to guide decision-making on risk factor focus, target areas, and populations. It showed variable NCD mortality rates related to tobacco use and AP across the participating countries, with tobacco as the main risk factor in the Kyrgyz Republic, Greece, and Romania, and AP prevailing in Pakistan and Uganda. Adolescent exposure levels, sources, and correlates varied. The study will continue with an in-depth situational analysis to guide the selection, adaptation, and integration of evidence-based interventions into the FRESHAIR4Life prevention package. This package will be implemented, evaluated, assessed for cost-effectiveness, and iteratively refined. The research places a strong emphasis on co-creation, capacity building, and comprehensive communication and dissemination.