Using health data for decision-making at each level of the health system to achieve universal health coverage in Ethiopia: the case of an immunization programme in a low-resource setting.

BACKGROUND: For evidence-based decision-making, there is a need for quality, timely, relevant and accessible information at each level of the health system. Limited use of local data at each level of the health system is reported to be a main challenge for evidence-based decision-making in low- and middle-income countries. Although evidence is available on the timeliness and quality of local data, we know little about how it is used for decision-making at different levels of the health system. Therefore, this study aimed to assess the level of data use and its effect on data quality and shared accountability at different levels of the health system. METHODS: An implementation science study was conducted using key informants and document reviews between January and September 2017. A total of 21 key informants were selected from community representatives, data producers, data users and decision-makers from the community to the regional level. Reviewed documents include facility reports, district reports, zonal reports and feedback in supervision from the district. Thematic content analysis was performed for the qualitative data. RESULTS: Respondents reported that routine data use for routine decision-making was low. All health facilities and health offices have a performance monitoring team, but these were not always functional. Awareness gaps, lack of motivating incentives, irregularity of supportive supervision, lack of community engagement in health report verification as well as poor technical capacity of health professionals were found to be the major barriers to data use. The study also revealed that there are no institutional or national-level regulations or policies on the accountability mechanisms related to health data. The community-level Health Development Army programme was found to be a strong community engagement approach that can be leveraged for data verification at the source of community data. CONCLUSION: The culture of using routine data for decision-making at the local level was found to be low. Strengthening the capacity of health workers and performance monitoring teams, introducing incentive mechanisms for data use, engaging the community in data verification and introducing accountability mechanisms for health data are essential to improve data use and quality.

Cross-cutting lessons from the Decision-Maker Led Implementation Research initiative.

BACKGROUND: Almost 20 million children under one year of age did not receive basic vaccines in 2019, and most of these children lived in low- and middle-income countries. Implementation research has been recognized as an emerging area that is critical to strengthen the implementation of interventions proven to be effective. As a component of strengthening implementation, WHO has called for greater embedding of research within decision-making processes. One strategy to facilitate the embedding of research is to engage decision-makers as Principal Investigators of the research. Since 2015, the Alliance for Health Policy and Systems Research within the WHO and the United Nations Children's Fund have supported decision-maker led research by partnering with Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance, in an initiative called "Decision-Maker Led Implementation Research". This synthesis paper describes the cross-cutting lessons from the initiative to further understand and develop future use of the decision-maker led strategy. METHODS: This study used qualitative methods of data collection, including a document review and in-depth interviews with decision-makers and researchers engaged in the initiative. Document extraction and thematic content analysis were applied. The individual project was the unit of analysis and the results were summarized across projects. RESULTS: Research teams from 11 of the 14 projects participated in this study, for an overall response rate of 78.6%. Most projects were carried out in countries in Africa and conducted at the sub-state or sub-district level. Seven enablers and five barriers to the process of conducting the studies or bringing about changes were identified. Key enablers were the relevance, acceptability, and integration of the research, while key barriers included unclear results, limited planning and support, and the limited role of a single study in informing changes to strengthen implementation. CONCLUSIONS: Decision-maker led research is a promising strategy to facilitate the embedding of research into decision-making processes and contribute to greater use of research to strengthen implementation of proven-effective interventions, such as immunization. We identified several lessons for consideration in the future design and use of the decision-maker led strategy.

A qualitative study of the development and utilization of health facility-based immunization microplans in Uganda.

BACKGROUND: In 2006, Uganda adopted the Reaching Every District strategy with the goal of attaining at least 80% coverage for routine immunizations in every district. The development and utilization of health facility/district immunization microplans is the key to the strategy. A number of reports have shown suboptimal development and use of microplans in Uganda. This study explores factors associated with suboptimal development and use of microplans in two districts in Uganda to pinpoint challenges encountered during the microplanning process. METHODS: A qualitative study was conducted comparing two districts: Kapchorwa, with low immunization coverage, and Luwero with high immunization coverage. Data were collected through multilevel observation of health facilities, planning sessions and planning meetings; records review of microplans, micromaps and meeting minutes; 57 interviews with health workers at the ministry level and lower-level health facility workers. Data were analysed using NVivo 8 qualitative text analysis software. Transcripts were coded, and memos and display matrices were developed to examine the process of developing and utilizing microplans, including experiences of health workers (implementers). RESULTS: Three key findings emerged from this study. First, there are significant knowledge gaps with regard to the microplanning process among health workers at all levels (community and district health facility and nationally). Limited knowledge about communities and programme catchment areas greatly hinders the planning process by limiting the ability to identify hard-to-reach areas and to prioritize areas according to need. Secondly, the microplanning tool is bulky and complex. Finally, microplanning is being implemented in the context of already overtasked health personnel who have to conduct several other activities as part of their daily routines. CONCLUSIONS: In order to achieve quality improvement as outlined in the Reaching Every District campaign, the microplanning process should be revised. Health workers' misunderstanding and limited knowledge about the microplanning process, especially at peripheral health facilities, coupled with the complex, bulky nature of the microplanning tool, reduces the effectiveness of microplanning in improving routine immunization in Uganda. This study reveals the need to reduce the complexity of the tool and to identify ways to train and support workers in the use of the revised tool, including support in incorporating the microplanning process into their busy schedules.

Embedding implementation research to enhance health policy and systems: a multi-country analysis from ten settings in Latin America and the Caribbean.

BACKGROUND: Progress towards universal health coverage requires health policies and systems that are informed by contextualised and actionable research. Many challenges impede the uptake of evidence to enhance health policy implementation and the coverage, quality, efficiency and equity of health systems. To address this need, we developed an innovative model of implementation research embedded in real-world policy and programme cycles and led directly by policy-makers and health systems decision-makers. The approach was tested in ten settings in Latin America and the Caribbean, supported under a common funding and capacity strengthening initiative. The present study aims to analyse ten embedded implementation research projects in order to identify barriers and facilitators to embedding research into policy and practice as well as to assess the programme, policy and systems improvements and the cross-cutting lessons in conducting research embedded in real-world policy and systems decision-making. METHODS: The multi-country analysis is based on the triangulation of data collected via three methods, namely (1) document review, (2) an electronic questionnaire and (3) in-depth interviews with decision-makers. Data from the document review was charted and narratively synthesised. Data from the questionnaire was used to assess three characteristics of the decision-maker's participation in embedded research, namely (1) level of engagement in different stages of research; (2) extent to which their capacities to conduct and use research were developed; and (3) the level of confidence in undertaking implementation research activities. Interview data was analysed using a thematic approach. RESULTS: The main barriers to effective delivery or scale-up of health interventions identified in the research projects were inadequate financing, fragmentation of healthcare services and information systems, limited capacity of health system stakeholders, insufficient time, cultural factors, and a lack of information. Decision-makers' experience in embedded research showed strong engagement in protocol development, moderate engagement in data collection and low engagement in data analysis. The in-depth interviews identified 17 facilitators and 8 barriers to embedding research into policy and systems. The principal facilitating factors were actionability of findings, relevance of research and engagement of decision-makers, whereas the main barriers were time and political processes. In Argentina, the research led to the development of new monitoring indicators to improve the implementation of the perinatal health policy, while in Chile, empirical findings supported the establishment of a training programme on reproductive rights, targeted to municipal health facilities. CONCLUSIONS: This multi-country analysis contributes to the evidence base for the embedded research approach to support health policy and systems decisions-making. Embedding research into policy and practice stimulates the relevance and applicability of research, while promoting decision-makers' engagement and likelihood to use research evidence in policy-making and health systems strengthening.

How to Improve Local-Level Data Use Culture at Each Level of the Health System? An Implementation Science Study.

Health programs are reliant on complex decision-making to efficiently utilize limited resources, but local-level data use is still challenging. This study aimed to assess barriers to fostering local-level data use culture at each level of a health system. Results show that awareness gaps, lack of motivation, inconsistent supervision, poor community engagement, and lack of accountability are major bottlenecks. Establishing an accountability system and capacity building on health data use could improve its implementation.

Hubris, humility and humanity: expanding evidence approaches for improving and sustaining community health programmes.

Community-based approaches are a critical foundation for many health outcomes, including reproductive, maternal, newborn and child health (RMNCH). Evidence is a vital part of strengthening that foundation, but largely focuses on the technical content of what must be done, rather than on how disparate community actors continuously interpret, implement and adapt interventions in dynamic and varied community health systems. We argue that efforts to strengthen evidence for community programmes must guard against the hubris of relying on a single approach or hierarchy of evidence for the range of research questions that arise when sustaining community programmes at scale. Moving forward we need a broader evidence agenda that better addresses the implementation realities influencing the scale and sustainability of community programmes and the partnerships underpinning them if future gains in community RMNCH are to be realised. This will require humility in understanding communities as social systems, the complexity of the interventions they engage with and the heterogeneity of evidence needs that address the implementation challenges faced. It also entails building common ground across epistemological word views to strengthen the robustness of implementation research by improving the use of conceptual frameworks, addressing uncertainty and fostering collaboration. Given the complexity of scaling up and sustaining community RMNCH, ensuring that evidence translates into action will require the ongoing brokering of relationships to support the human creativity, scepticism and scaffolding that together build layers of evidence, critical thinking and collaborative learning to effect change.

How can the use of data within the immunisation programme be increased in order to improve data quality and ensure greater accountability in the health system? A protocol for implementation science study.

BACKGROUND: Immunisation remains one of the most important and cost-effective interventions to reduce vaccine-preventable child morbidity, disability and mortality. Health programmes like the Expanded Program of Immunization rely on complex decision-making and strong local level evidence is important to effectively and efficiently utilise limited resources. Lack of data use for decision-making at each level of the health system remains the main challenge in most developing countries. While there is much evidence on data quality and how to improve it, there is a lack of sufficient evidence on why the use of data for decision-making at each level of the health system is low. Herein, we describe a comprehensive implementation science study that will be conducted to identify organisational, technical and individual level factors affecting local data use at each level of the Ethiopian health system. METHODS: We will apply a mixed methods approach using key informant interviews and document reviews. The qualitative data will be gathered through key informant interviews using a semi-structured guide with open- and closed-ended questions with four categories of respondents, namely decision-makers, data producers, data users and community representatives at the federal, regional, zonal, woreda and community levels of the health system. The document review will be conducted on selected reports and feedback documented at different levels of the health system. Data will be collected from July 2017 to March 2018. Descriptive statistics will be analysed for the quantitative study using SPSS version 20 software and thematic content analysis will be performed for the qualitative part using NVivo software. DISCUSSION: Appropriate and timely use of health and health-related information for decision-making is an essential element in the process of transforming the health sector. The findings of the study will inform stakeholders at different levels on the institutionalisation of evidence-based practice in immunisation programmes.

Embedding research to improve program implementation in Latin America and the Caribbean.

In the last 10 years, implementation research has come to play a critical role in improving the implementation of already-proven health interventions by promoting the systematic uptake of research findings and other evidence-based strategies into routine practice. The Alliance for Health Policy and Systems Research and the Pan American Health Organization implemented a program of embedded implementation research to support health programs in Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC) in 2014-2015. A total of 234 applications were received from 28 countries in the Americas. The Improving Program Implementation through Embedded Research (iPIER) scheme supported 12 implementation research projects led by health program implementers from nine LAC countries: Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Mexico, Panama, Peru, and Saint Lucia. Through this experience, we learned that the "insider" perspective, which implementers bring to the research proposal, is particularly important in identifying research questions that focus on the systems failures that often manifest in barriers to implementation. This paper documents the experience of and highlights key conclusions about the conduct of embedded implementation research. The iPIER experience has shown great promise for embedded research models that place implementers at the helm of implementation research initiatives.

Embedding research to improve program implementation in Latin America and the Caribbean / Integrar a pesquisa para melhorar a implementação de programas na América Latina e no Caribe

In the last 10 years, implementation research has come to play a critical role in improving the implementation of already-proven health interventions by promoting the systematic uptake of research findings and other evidence-based strategies into routine practice. The Alliance for Health Policy and Systems Research and the Pan American Health Organization implemented a program of embedded implementation research to support health programs in Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC) in 2014–2015. A total of 234 applications were received from 28 countries in the Americas. The Improving Program Implementation through Embedded Research (iPIER) scheme supported 12 implementation research projects led by health program implementers from nine LAC countries: Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Mexico, Panama, Peru, and Saint Lucia. Through this experience, we learned that the “insider” perspective, which implementers bring to the research proposal, is particularly important in identifying research questions that focus on the systems failures that often manifest in barriers to implementation. This paper documents the experience of and highlights key conclusions about the conduct of embedded implementation research. The iPIER experience has shown great promise for embedded research models that place implementers at the helm of implementation research initiatives.

Na última década, a pesquisa em implementação tem tido papel fundamental em melhorar a implementação de intervenções de saúde comprovadas com o incentivo à absorção metódica dos resultados de pesquisas e outras constatações na prática diária. A Aliança para Pesquisa em Políticas e Sistemas de Saúde e a Organização Pan-Americana da Saúde criaram um programa de pesquisa em implementação integrada para dar respaldo aos programas de saúde na América Latina e no Caribe (ALC) em 2014–2015. Foram recebidas ao todo 234 propostas provenientes de 28 países nas Américas. A iniciativa Melhorar a Implementação de Programas com Pesquisa Integrada (iPIER) subsidiou 12 projetos de pesquisa em implementação conduzidos pelos responsáveis pela execução dos programas públicos de saúde de nove países da ALC: Argentina, Bolívia, Brasil, Chile, Colômbia, México, Panamá, Peru e Santa Lúcia. Esta experiência ensinou que a perspectiva dos “insiders” (pessoal interno), que os responsáveis pela execução dos programas imprimem à proposta da pesquisa, é essencial para identificar a problemática a ser pesquisada com foco nas falhas dos sistemas, que em geral se manifestam como obstáculos à implementação. Neste artigo se destacam a experiência e as principais conclusões sobre a realização de pesquisa em implementação integrada. A experiência iPIER demonstrou serem bastante promissores os modelos de pesquisa integrada quando os responsáveis pela execução dos programas assumem as rédeas das iniciativas de pesquisa em implementação.

En los últimos 10 años, las investigaciones sobre la ejecución de programas han desempeñado una función crucial en lo que respecta a la mejora de la ejecución de intervenciones de salud de eficacia comprobada, porque han promovido la incorporación sistemática de los resultados de investigaciones y otras estrategias basadas en datos probatorios en la práctica cotidiana. Entre el 2014 y el 2015, la Alianza para la Investigación en Políticas y Sistemas de Salud, y la Organización Panamericana de la Salud pusieron en marcha un proyecto que propone incorporar las investigaciones sobre la ejecución para apoyar a los programas de salud en América Latina y el Caribe. En total, se recibieron 234 solicitudes de 28 países de las Américas. La iniciativa “Mejora de la Ejecución de los Programas mediante la Incorporación de la Investigación (iPIER)” respaldó la realización de 12 proyectos de investigación dirigidos por ejecutores de programas de salud de nueve países de América Latina y el Caribe: Argentina, Bolivia, Brasil, Chile, Colombia, México, Panamá, Perú y Santa Lucía. Gracias a esta experiencia, somos conscientes de que la perspectiva “desde dentro”, con la que contribuyen los ejecutores a la propuesta de investigación, es particularmente importante para definir las preguntas de investigación que apuntan a las deficiencias de los sistemas a menudo manifestadas a través de obstáculos que dificultan la ejecución. Este artículo documenta la experiencia derivada de las investigaciones incorporadas en la ejecución de los programas y destaca las conclusiones más importantes. La experiencia iPIER resulta muy prometedora para los modelos de ejecución que proponen incorporar las investigaciones y que colocan a los ejecutores al mando de estas iniciativas.