Operationalizing the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research to build and support the lived experience workforce in direct health service provision.

BACKGROUND: The involvement of people with lived experience (LEX) workers in the development, design, and delivery of integrated health services seeks to improve service user engagement and health outcomes and reduce healthcare gaps. Yet, LEX workers report feeling undervalued and having limited influence on service delivery. There is a need for systematic improvements in how LEX workforces are engaged and supported to ensure the LEX workforce can fully contribute to integrated systems of care. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to operationalize the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) using a rigorous scoping review methodology and co-creation process, so it could be used by health services seeking to build and strengthen their LEX workforce. SEARCH STRATEGY: A systematic literature search of four databases was undertaken to identify peer-reviewed studies published between 2016 and 2022 providing evidence of the inclusion of LEX workers in direct health service provision. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: A descriptive-analytical method was used to map current evidence of LEX workers onto the CFIR. Then, co-creation sessions with LEX workers (n = 4) and their counterparts-nonpeer workers (n = 2)-further clarified the structural policies and strategies that allow people with LEX to actively participate in the provision and enhancement of integrated health service delivery. MAIN RESULTS: Essential components underpinning the successful integration of LEX roles included: the capacity to engage in a co-creation process with individuals with LEX before the implementation of the role or intervention; and enhanced representation of LEX across organizational structures. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: The adapted CFIR for LEX workers (CFIR-LEX) that was developed as a result of this work clarifies contextual components that support the successful integration of LEX roles into the development, design, and delivery of integrated health services. Further work must be done to operationalize the framework in a local context and to better understand the ongoing application of the framework in a health setting. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: People with LEX were involved in the operationalization of the CFIR, including contributing their expertise to the domain adaptations that were relevant to the LEX workforce.

Midwife-led birthing centres in Bangladesh, Pakistan and Uganda: an economic evaluation of case study sites.

INTRODUCTION: Achieving the Sustainable Development Goals to reduce maternal and neonatal mortality rates will require the expansion and strengthening of quality maternal health services. Midwife-led birth centres (MLBCs) are an alternative to hospital-based care for low-risk pregnancies where the lead professional at the time of birth is a trained midwife. These have been used in many countries to improve birth outcomes. METHODS: The cost analysis used primary data collection from four MLBCs in Bangladesh, Pakistan and Uganda (n=12 MLBC sites). Modelled cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted to compare the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), measured as incremental cost per disability-adjusted life-year (DALY) averted, of MLBCs to standard care in each country. Results were presented in 2022 US dollars. RESULTS: Cost per birth in MLBCs varied greatly within and between countries, from US$21 per birth at site 3, Bangladesh to US$2374 at site 2, Uganda. Midwife salary and facility operation costs were the primary drivers of costs in most MLBCs. Six of the 12 MLBCs produced better health outcomes at a lower cost (dominated) compared with standard care; and three produced better health outcomes at a higher cost compared with standard care, with ICERs ranging from US$571/DALY averted to US$55 942/DALY averted. CONCLUSION: MLBCs appear to be able to produce better health outcomes at lower cost or be highly cost-effective compared with standard care. Costs do vary across sites and settings, and so further exploration of costs and cost-effectiveness as a part of implementation and establishment activities should be a priority.