COVID-19 preparedness and response in rural and remote areas: A scoping review.

This scoping review used the Arksey and O'Malley approach to explore COVID-19 preparedness and response in rural and remote areas to identify lessons to inform future health preparedness and response planning. A search of scientific and grey literature for rural COVID-19 preparedness and responses identified 5 668 articles published between 2019 and early 2022. A total of 293 articles were included, of which 160 (54.5%) were from high income countries and 106 (36.2%) from middle income countries. Studies focused mostly on the Maintenance of Essential Health Services (63; 21.5%), Surveillance, epidemiological investigation, contact tracing and adjustment of public health and social measures (60; 20.5%), Coordination and Planning (32; 10.9%); Case Management (30; 10.2%), Social Determinants of Health (29; 10%) and Risk Communication (22; 7.5%). Rural health systems were less prepared and national COVID-19 responses were often not adequately tailored to rural areas. Promising COVID-19 responses involved local leaders and communities, were collaborative and multisectoral, and engaged local cultures. Non-pharmaceutical interventions were applied less, support for access to water and sanitation at scale was weak, and more targeted approaches to the isolation of cases and quarantine of contacts were preferable to blanket lockdowns. Rural pharmacists, community health workers and agricultural extension workers assisted in overcoming shortages of health professionals. Vaccination coverage was hindered by weaker rural health systems. Digital technology enabled better coordination, communication, and access to health services, yet for some was inaccessible. Rural livelihoods and food security were affected through disruptions to local labour markets, farm produce markets and input supply chains. Important lessons include the need for rural proofing national health preparedness and response and optimizing synergies between top-down planning with localised planning and coordination. Equity-oriented rural health systems strengthening and action on rural social determinants is essential to better prepare for and respond to future outbreaks.

Effectiveness of Social Inclusion Interventions for Anxiety and Depression among Adolescents: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Adolescents who are socially excluded are at increased risk of mental health problems such as depression and anxiety. Promoting social inclusion could be an effective strategy for preventing and treating adolescent depression and anxiety. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of intervention studies which aimed to prevent or treat adolescent depression and/or anxiety by promoting social inclusion. Throughout the review we engaged a youth advisory group of 13 young people (aged 21-24) from Uganda, Turkey, Syria, South Africa, and Egypt. RESULTS: We identified 12 studies relevant to our review. The interventions tested use a range of different strategies to increase social inclusion and reduce depression and anxiety, including social skills training, psychoeducation, teaching life skills training, and cash transfers. Pooled standardised mean differences (SMDs) based on random-effects models showed medium-to-large benefits of interventions on improving depression and anxiety symptoms (n = 8; SMD = -0.62; 95% CI, -1.23 to -0.01, p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Although there are not many studies, those which have been done show promising results that strongly suggest that social inclusion could be an important component of programmes to promote adolescent mental health.

Towards a harmonised framework for developing quality of care indicators for global health: a scoping review of existing conceptual and methodological practices.

OBJECTIVES: Despite significant advances in the science of quality of care measurement over the last decade, approaches to developing quality of care indicators for global health priorities are not clearly defined. We conducted a scoping review of concepts and methods used to develop quality of healthcare indicators to better inform ongoing efforts towards a more harmonised approach to quality of care indicator development in global health. METHODS: We conducted a systematic search of electronic databases, grey literature and references for articles on developing quality of care indicators for routine monitoring in all healthcare settings and populations, published in English between 2010 and 2020. We used well-established methods for article screening and selection, data extraction and management. Results were summarised using a descriptive analysis and a narrative synthesis. RESULTS: The 221 selected articles were largely from high-income settings (89%), particularly the USA (46%), Canada (9%), UK (9%) and Europe (17%). Quality of care indicators were developed mainly for healthcare providers (56%), for benchmarking or quality assurance (37%) and quality improvement (29%), in hospitals (32%) and primary care (26%), across many diseases. The terms 'quality indicator' and 'quality measure' were the most frequently encountered terms (50% and 21%, respectively). Systematic approaches for quality of care indicator development emerged within national quality of care systems or through cross-country collaborations in high-income settings. Maternal, neonatal and child health (33%), mental health (26%) and primary care (57%) studies applied most components of systematic approaches, but not consistently or rigorously. DISCUSSION: The current evidence shows variations in concepts and approaches to developing quality of care indicators, with development and application mainly in high-income countries. CONCLUSION: Additional efforts are needed to propose 'best-practice' conceptual frameworks and methods for developing quality of care indicators to improve their utility in global health measurement.

Improving the design of studies evaluating the impact of diagnostic tests for tuberculosis on health outcomes: a qualitative study of perspectives of diverse stakeholders.

Background: Studies evaluating the impact of Xpert MTB/RIF testing for tuberculosis (TB) have demonstrated varied effects on health outcomes with many studies showing inconclusive results. We explored perceptions among diverse stakeholders about studies evaluating the impact of TB diagnostic tests, and identified suggestions for improving these studies. Methods: We used purposive sampling with consideration for differing expertise and geographical balance and conducted in depth semi-structured interviews. We interviewed English-speaking participants, including TB patients, and others involved in research, care or decision-making about TB diagnostics. We used the thematic approach to code and analyse the interview transcripts. Results: We interviewed 31 participants. Our study showed that stakeholders had different expectations with regard to test impact and how it is measured. TB test impact studies were perceived to be important for supporting implementation of tests but there were concerns about the unrealistic expectations placed on tests to improve outcomes in health systems with many influencing factors. To improve TB test impact studies, respondents suggested conducting health system assessments prior to the study; developing clear guidance on the study methodology and interpretation; improving study design by describing questions and interventions that consider the influences of the health-care ecosystem on the diagnostic test; selecting the target population at the health-care level most likely to benefit from the test; setting realistic targets for effect sizes in the sample size calculations; and interpreting study results carefully and avoiding categorisation and interpretation of results based on statistical significance alone. Researchers should involve multiple stakeholders in the design of studies. Advocating for more funding to support robust studies is essential. Conclusion: TB test impact studies were perceived to be important to support implementation of tests but there were concerns about their complexity. Process evaluations of their health system context and guidance for their design and interpretation are recommended.

Promoting handwashing and sanitation behaviour change in low-and middle-income countries: a mixed-method systematic review

This systematic review shows which promotional approaches are effective in changing handwashing and sanitation behaviour and which implementation factors affect the success or failure of such interventions. The authors find that promotional approaches can be effective in terms of handwashing with soap, latrine use, safe faeces disposal and open defecation. No one specific approach is most effective. However, several promotional elements do induce behaviour change. Different barriers and facilitators that influence implementing promotional approaches should be carefully considered when developing new policy, programming, practice, or research in this area.