How are health systems in sub-Saharan Africa adapting to protect human health from climate change threats? A scoping review and case study.

BACKGROUND: Sub-Saharan Africa stands out as one of the regions most affected by the climate crisis, while it has contributed to the problem only marginally. The foreseen negative effect on health adds great stress to the already overburdened health systems. Health systems' adaptation to climate change is, therefore, urgently needed to better protect human health. There is, however, scant evidence on how adaption is being planned and implemented in Africa. The aim of this study was to review the literature on health system adaptation in sub-Saharan Africa. METHODS: In this scoping review and case study, we first carried out the scoping review, searching for publications on adaptation measures using the PubMed, Science Direct, and Web of Science databases on July 1, 2023. We included papers in English and French that addressed the adaptation of health systems in countries in sub-Saharan Africa without time limit. Second, we did a case study of the design and implementation of the National Adaptation Plan of Benin, with a specific focus on the policy-making process underlying the plan, whereby we used the health policy triangle as a policy analysis framework. Data were collected through a document review of national policy plans, reports, and evaluations. FINDINGS: A total of 14 papers met the inclusion criteria, showing that climate change adaptation remains a niche in the literature for sub-Saharan Africa. Most included papers were authored by individuals from high-income countries. Health system adaptation measures cover seven domains: health systems strengthening; policy and planning; financing and implementation; information and capacity building; societal resilience; disaster risk prevention, preparedness, response, and recovery; and mitigation. The review found that the dominant role of global agencies in supporting or steering health system adaptation planning contributes to policy mimicry across countries, as confirmed by the case study of the adaptation plan in Benin. Benin's National Adaptation Plan prioritised three climate hazards: heat, drought, and flooding. Although the financial and technical inputs of international agencies effectively support Benin's adaptation planning, these inputs might induce a more narrow focus that does not fully respond to Benin's needs in terms of climate shocks and adaptation priorities. INTERPRETATION: Health systems in sub-Saharan Africa are already adapting to climate change. Future research could focus on how national governments could develop adaptation plans that are responsive to local needs by making the needs analysis and priority-setting processes more inclusive of local stakeholders. FUNDING: The Belgian Directorate-General for Development Cooperation and Humanitarian Aid.

Methods in realist evaluation: A mapping review.

Realist evaluation is becoming increasingly popular as an evaluation methodology. Its main objective is to uncover the mechanisms that lead to observed outcomes following an intervention and the contextual conditions that enabled this. The focus is on explaining why, for whom and in what circumstances an intervention works. It is a theory-driven approach and is explicitly method neutral, meaning that both quantitative and qualitative data collection methods can be used to unearth the underlying mechanisms that cause the intervention outcomes. In this review, we aim to map the methods used in realist evaluation studies, to draw lessons from the findings and to reflect on ways forward. We found that qualitative methods and interviews specifically are most commonly used in realist evaluations; that theory is often absent behind the methods and sampling techniques used; and that more innovative methods remain underexplored. We conclude the review by proposing four ways forward: (1) developing realist surveys, (2) exploring the relevance of innovative methods, (3) increasing the attention paid to sampling procedures and (4) strengthening the theory-driven nature of method. We believe that these four action points can strengthen the practice of realist evaluation and its outcomes.

Strengthening capacity in hospitals to reduce perinatal morbidity and mortality through a codesigned intervention package: protocol for a realist evaluation as part of a stepped-wedge trial of the Action Leveraging Evidence to Reduce perinatal morTality and morbidity (ALERT) in sub-Saharan Africa project.

INTRODUCTION: Despite a strong evidence base for developing interventions to reduce child mortality and morbidity related to pregnancy and delivery, major knowledge-implementation gaps remain. The Action Leveraging Evidence to Reduce perinatal morTality and morbidity (ALERT) in sub-Saharan Africa project aims to overcome these gaps through strengthening the capacity of multidisciplinary teams that provide maternity care. The intervention includes competency-based midwife training, community engagement for study design, mentoring and quality improvement cycles. The realist process evaluation of ALERT aims at identifying and testing the causal pathway through which the intervention achieves its impact. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This realist process evaluation complements the effectiveness evaluation and the economic evaluation of the ALERT intervention. Following the realist evaluation cycle, we will first elicit the initial programme theory on the basis of the ALERT theory of change, a review of the evidence on adoption and diffusion of innovations and the perspectives of the stakeholders. Second, we will use a multiple embedded case study design to empirically test the initial programme theory in two hospitals in each of the four intervention countries. Qualitative and quantitative data will be collected, using in-depth interviews with hospital staff and mothers, observations, patient exit interviews and (hospital) document reviews. Analysis will be guided by the Intervention-Actors-Context-Mechanism-Outcome configuration heuristic. We will use thematic coding to analyse the qualitative data. The quantitative data will be analysed descriptively and integrated in the analysis using a retroductive approach. Each case study will end with a refined programme theory (in-case analysis). Third, we will carry out a cross-case comparison within and between the four countries. Comparison between study countries should enable identifying relevant context factors that influence effectiveness and implementation, leading to a mid-range theory that may inform the scaling up the intervention. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: In developing this protocol, we paid specific attention to cultural sensitivity, the do no harm principle, confidentiality and non-attribution. We received ethical approval from the local and national institutional review boards in Tanzania, Uganda, Malawi, Benin, Sweden and Belgium. Written or verbal consent of respondents will be secured after explaining the purpose, potential benefits and potential harms of the study using an information sheet. The results will be disseminated through workshops with the hospital staff and national policymakers, and scientific publications and conferences. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: PACTR202006793783148.