Health in All Policies utilization by municipal governments: scoping review.

The aim of this scoping review was to examine the utilization of a Health in All Policies (HiAP) approach in municipal government settings. Specific objectives included: to review peer reviewed and grey literature, to identify common themes from the literature, and to highlight gaps in the evidence base for HiAP. An iterative scoping review method was used. Documents were identified through searches of academic databases, reference lists and journal indices, and the World Wide Web. Included documents focused on HiAP in the local or municipal government context, published in English, between 2006 and 2015. Data were extracted and analyzed using descriptive statistics and a narrative thematic method. As of June 2015, 26 documents met the inclusion criteria. A lack of research studies examining HiAP in the municipal government context was identified. Three broad themes were abstracted from analysis of the documents: the conceptualization of HiAP, the adoption of HiAP, and the implementation of HiAP. The focus on a HiAP approach at the municipal level of government is growing. A majority of the existing documents provide narrative evidence and recommendations for implementing a HiAP approach at the municipal level. Research is needed in the areas of conceptualization, implementation, adoption and evaluation of a HiAP approach in municipal settings.

Indicators and Measurement Tools for Health Systems Integration: A Knowledge Synthesis.

BACKGROUND: Despite far reaching support for integrated care, conceptualizing and measuring integrated care remains challenging. This knowledge synthesis aimed to identify indicator domains and tools to measure progress towards integrated care. METHODS: We used an established framework and a Delphi survey with integration experts to identify relevant measurement domains. For each domain, we searched and reviewed the literature for relevant tools. FINDINGS: From 7,133 abstracts, we retrieved 114 unique tools. We found many quality tools to measure care coordination, patient engagement and team effectiveness/performance. In contrast, there were few tools in the domains of performance measurement and information systems, alignment of organizational goals and resource allocation. The search yielded 12 tools that measure overall integration or three or more indicator domains. DISCUSSION: Our findings highlight a continued gap in tools to measure foundational components that support integrated care. In the absence of such targeted tools, "overall integration" tools may be useful for a broad assessment of the overall state of a system. CONCLUSIONS: Continued progress towards integrated care depends on our ability to evaluate the success of strategies across different levels and context. This study has identified 114 tools that measure integrated care across 16 domains, supporting efforts towards a unified measurement framework.

Indicators and measurement tools for health system integration: a knowledge synthesis protocol.

BACKGROUND: Health system integration is a key component of health system reform with the goal of improving outcomes for patients, providers, and the health system. Although health systems continue to strive for better integration, current delivery of health services continues to be fragmented. A key gap in the literature is the lack of information on what successful integration looks like and how to measure achievement towards an integrated system. This multi-site study protocol builds on a prior knowledge synthesis completed by two of the primary investigators which identified 10 key principles that collectively support health system integration. The aim is to answer two research questions: What are appropriate indicators for each of the 10 key integration principles developed in our previous knowledge synthesis and what measurement tools are used to measure these indicators? To enhance generalizability of the findings, a partnership between Canada and Brazil was created as health system integration is a priority in both countries and they share similar contexts. METHODS/DESIGN: This knowledge synthesis will follow an iterative scoping review process with emerging information from knowledge-user engagement leading to the refinement of research questions and study selection. This paper describes the methods for each phase of the study. Research questions were developed with stakeholder input. Indicator identification and prioritization will utilize a modified Delphi method and patient/user focus groups. Based on priority indicators, a search of the literature will be completed and studies screened for inclusion. Quality appraisal of relevant studies will be completed prior to data extraction. Results will be used to develop recommendations and key messages to be presented through integrated and end-of-grant knowledge translation strategies with researchers and knowledge-users from the three jurisdictions. DISCUSSION: This project will directly benefit policy and decision-makers by providing an easy accessible set of indicators and tools to measure health system integration across different contexts and cultures. Being able to evaluate the success of integration strategies and initiatives will lead to better health system design and improved health outcomes for patients.