Allan Best

Systems Thinking to Improve the Public's Health

Improving population health requires understanding and changing societal structures and functions, but countervailing forces sometimes undermine those changes, thus reflecting the adaptive complexity inherent in public health systems. The purpose of this paper is to propose systems thinking as a conceptual rubric for the practice of team science in public health, and transdisciplinary, translational research as a catalyst for promoting the functional efficiency of science. The paper lays a foundation for the conceptual understanding of systems thinking and transdisciplinary research, and will provide illustrative examples within and beyond public health. A set of recommendations for a systems-centric approach to translational science will be presented.

An Integrative Framework for Community Partnering to Translate Theory Into Effective Health Promotion Strategy

Introduction. Although there is general agreement about the complex interplay among individual-, family-, organizational-, and community-level factors as they influence health outcomes, there is still a gap between health promotion research and practice. The authors suggest that a disjuncture exists between the multiple theories and models of health promotion and the practitioners need for a more unified set of guidelines for comprehensive planning of programs. Therefore, we put forward in this paper an idea toward closing the gap between research and practice, a case for developing an overarching framework—with several health promotion models that could integrate existing theories—and applying it to comprehensive health promotion strategy. An Integrative Framework. We outline a theoretical foundation for future health promotion research and practice that integrates four models: the social ecology; the Life Course Health Development; the Predisposing, Reinforcing, and Enabling Constructs in Educational/Environmental Diagnosis and Evaluation–Policy, Regulatory and Organizational Constructs in Educational and Environmental Development; and the community partnering models. The first three models are well developed and complementary. There is little consensus on the latter model, community partnering. However, we suggest that such a model is a vital part of an overall framework, and we present an approach to reconciling theoretical tensions among researchers and practitioners involved in community health promotion. Integrating the Models: The Need for Systems Theory and Thinking. Systems theory has been relatively ignored both by the health promotion field and, more generally, by the health services. We make a case for greater use of systems theory in the development of an overall framework, both to improve integration and to incorporate key concepts from the diverse systems literatures of other disciplines. Vision for Healthy Communities. (1) Researchers and practitioners understand the complex interplay among individual-, family-, organizational-, and community-level factors as they influence population health; (2) health promotion researchers and practitioners collaborate effectively with others in the community to create integrated strategies that work as a system to address a wide array of health-related factors; (3) The Healthy People Objectives for the Nation includes balanced indicators to reflect health promotion realities and research-measures effects on all levels; (4) the gap between community health promotion “best practices” guidelines and the way things work in the everyday world of health promotion practice has been substantially closed. Conclusions and Recommendations. We suggest critical next steps toward closing the gap between health promotion research and practice: investing in networks that promote, support, and sustain ongoing dialogue and sharing of experience; finding common ground in an approach to community partnering; and gaining consensus on the proposed integrating framework.

Complementary and alternative medicine use by Canadian patients with inflammatory bowel disease: results from a national survey.

OBJECTIVES:Previous studies of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) use by patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) have relied on samples from specialty clinics. The aim of this study was to determine the prevalence of use and perceived outcomes of CAM in a large, diverse IBD populationMETHODS:A postal survey of the members of the Crohns and Colitis Foundation of Canada gathered data on demographic, disease, and conventional IBD treatment characteristics, and on the use and perceived effects of CAM. Respondents were characterized as not using CAM, as past or present users of CAM for their IBD, or as present users of CAM for other reasons. Comparisons between groups were made with the χ2 test.RESULTS:The final sample included 2847 IBD patients. Current or past use of CAM for IBD was reported by 1332 patients, of whom 666 continued their use of CAM. Use was lowest in the eastern provinces and highest in the west. Only 15% had used CAM before their IBD diagnosis. Herbal therapies were the most commonly used (41% of CAM users). Improvements in sense of well-being, IBD symptoms, and sense of control over the disease were the most commonly reported benefits. Only 16% of prior CAM users reported any adverse effect of CAM use. A complementary practitioner was consulted by 34%. During the previous year, 46% had spend more than

Building knowledge integration systems for evidence-informed decisions.

250 on CAM.CONCLUSIONS:Use of CAM by IBD patients is very common. Most of these patients attribute significant benefits to their CAM use. Few report significant adverse events.

Why patients with inflammatory bowel disease use or do not use complementary and alternative medicine: a Canadian national survey.

PURPOSE This paper aims to describe methods and models designed to build a comprehensive, integrative framework to guide the research to policy and practice cycle in health care. DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH Current models of science are summarised, identifying specific challenges they create for knowledge to action (KTA). Alternative models for KTA are outlined to illustrate how researchers and decision makers can work together to fit the KTA model to specific problems and contexts. The Canadian experience with the evolving paradigm shift is described, along with recent initiatives to develop platforms and tools that support the new thinking. Recent projects to develop and refine methods for embedded research are described. The paper concludes with a summary of lessons learned and recommendations that will move the KTA field towards an integrated science. FINDINGS Conceptual models for KTA are advancing, benefiting from advances in team science, development of logic models that address the realities of complex adaptive systems, and new methods to more rapidly deliver knowledge syntheses more useful to decision and policy makers. PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS KTA is more likely when co-produced by researchers, practitioners, and policy makers. Closer collaboration requires shifts in thinking about the ways we work, capacity development, and greater learning from practice. ORIGINALITY/VALUE More powerful ways of thinking about the complexities of knowledge to action are provided, along with examples of tools and priorities drawn from systems thinking.

A time-responsive tool for informing policy making: rapid realist review

BACKGROUND The use of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) is common in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). OBJECTIVES To determine the factors associated with use of CAM, the reasons commonly cited for use or nonuse of CAM, and the correlations between the factors associated with use of CAM and reasons for CAM use. SUBJECTS The study included 2828 members of the Crohns and Colitis Foundation of Canada. METHODS Subjects were mailed a questionnaire that included items on demographic characteristics, disease and treatment history, health attitudes and behaviours, and reasons for use or nonuse of CAM. Logistical regression was used to determine significant associations with current CAM use. RESULTS In patients with Crohns disease and ulcerative colitis, CAM use was associated with more severe disease activity, use of CAM for other purposes, use of exercise and prayer for IBD, and a desire for an active role in treatment decisions. CAM use was also associated with younger age in those with Crohns disease, and less confidence in their IBD physician in those with ulcerative colitis. The most common reasons for CAM use were a desire for greater control, having heard or read that CAM might help, and the emphasis CAM places on treating the whole person. The most common reasons for not using CAM were that conventional treatments were successful, that not enough was known about CAM and a belief that CAM would not help. CONCLUSION Disease activity and health attitudes and behaviours, but not demographic characteristics, are associated with CAM use by those with IBD.

A national survey on the patterns of treatment of inflammatory bowel disease in Canada.

BackgroundA realist synthesis attempts to provide policy makers with a transferable theory that suggests a certain program is more or less likely to work in certain respects, for particular subjects, in specific kinds of situations. Yet realist reviews can require considerable and sustained investment over time, which does not always suit the time-sensitive demands of many policy decisions. ‘Rapid Realist Review’ methodology (RRR) has been developed as a tool for applying a realist approach to a knowledge synthesis process in order to produce a product that is useful to policy makers in responding to time-sensitive and/or emerging issues, while preserving the core elements of realist methodology.MethodsUsing examples from completed RRRs, we describe key features of the RRR methodology, the resources required, and the strengths and limitations of the process. All aspects of an RRR are guided by both a local reference group, and a group of content experts. Involvement of knowledge users and external experts ensures both the usability of the review products, as well as their links to current practice.ResultsRRRs have proven useful in providing evidence for and making explicit what is known on a given topic, as well as articulating where knowledge gaps may exist. From the RRRs completed to date, findings broadly adhere to four (often overlapping) classifications: guiding rules for policy-making; knowledge quantification (i.e., the amount of literature available that identifies context, mechanisms, and outcomes for a given topic); understanding tensions/paradoxes in the evidence base; and, reinforcing or refuting beliefs and decisions taken.Conclusions‘Traditional’ realist reviews and RRRs have some key differences, which allow policy makers to apply each type of methodology strategically to maximize its utility within a particular local constellation of history, goals, resources, politics and environment. In particular, the RRR methodology is explicitly designed to engage knowledge users and review stakeholders to define the research questions, and to streamline the review process. In addition, results are presented with a focus on context-specific explanations for what works within a particular set of parameters rather than producing explanations that are potentially transferrable across contexts and populations. For policy makers faced with making difficult decisions in short time frames for which there is sufficient (if limited) published/research and practice-based evidence available, RRR provides a practical, outcomes-focused knowledge synthesis method.

Strengthening health systems in low-income countries by enhancing organizational capacities and improving institutions

BackgroundThere is a general lack of information on the care of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) in a broad, geographically diverse, non-clinic population. The purposes of this study were (1) to compare a sample drawn from the membership of a national Crohns and Colitis Foundation to published clinic-based and population-based IBD samples, (2) to describe current patterns of health care use, and (3) to determine if unexpected variations exist in how and by whom IBD is treated.MethodsMailed survey of 4453 members of the Crohns and Colitis Foundation of Canada. The questionnaire, in members stated language of preference, included items on demographic and disease characteristics, general health behaviors and current and past IBD treatment. Each member received an initial and one reminder mailing.ResultsQuestionnaires were returned by 1787, 913, and 128 people with Crohns disease, ulcerative colitis and indeterminate colitis, respectively. At least one operation had been performed on 1159 Crohns disease patients, with risk increasing with duration of disease. Regional variation in surgical rates in ulcerative colitis patients was identified. 6-Mercaptopurine/Azathioprine was used by 24% of patients with Crohns disease and 12% of patients with ulcerative colitis (95% CI for the difference: 8.9% – 15%). In patients with Crohns disease, use was not associated with gender, income or region of residence but was associated with age and markers of disease activity. Infliximab was used by 112 respondents (4%), the majority of whom had Crohns disease. Variations in infliximab use based on region of residence and income were not seen. Sixty-eight percent of respondents indicated that they depended most on a gastroenterologist for their IBD care. There was significant regional variation in this. However, satisfaction with primary physician did not depend on physician type (for example, gastroenterologist versus general practitioner).ConclusionThis study achieved the goal of obtaining a large, geographically diverse sample that is more representative of the general IBD population than a clinic sample would have been. We could find no evidence of significant regional variation in medical treatments due to gender, region of residence or income level. Differences were noted between different age groups, which deserves further attention.

Sustaining organizational culture change in health systems

BackgroundThis paper argues that the global health agenda tends to privilege short-term global interests at the expense of long-term capacity building within national and community health systems. The Health Systems Strengthening (HSS) movement needs to focus on developing the capacity of local organizations and the institutions that influence how such organizations interact with local and international stakeholders.DiscussionWhile institutions can enable organizations, they too often apply requirements to follow paths that can stifle learning and development. Global health actors have recognized the importance of supporting local organizations in HSS activities. However, this recognition has yet to translate adequately into actual policies to influence funding and practice. While there is not a single approach to HSS that can be uniformly applied to all contexts, several messages emerge from the experience of successful health systems presented in this paper using case studies through a complex adaptive systems lens. Two key messages deserve special attention: the need for donors and recipient organizations to work as equal partners, and the need for strong and diffuse leadership in low-income countries.SummaryAn increasingly dynamic and interdependent post-Millennium Development Goals (post-MDG) world requires new ways of working to improve global health, underpinned by a complex adaptive systems lens and approaches that build local organizational capacity.

Translating Cancer Control Research Into Primary Care Practice: A Conceptual Framework:

PURPOSE The questions addressed by this review are: first, what are the guiding principles underlying efforts to stimulate sustained cultural change; second, what are the mechanisms by which these principles operate; and, finally, what are the contextual factors that influence the likelihood of these principles being effective? The paper aims to discuss these issues. DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH The authors conducted a literature review informed by rapid realist review methodology that examined how interventions interact with contexts and mechanisms to influence the sustainability of cultural change. Reference and expert panelists assisted in refining the research questions, systematically searching published and grey literature, and helping to identify interactions between interventions, mechanisms and contexts. FINDINGS Six guiding principles were identified: align vision and action; make incremental changes within a comprehensive transformation strategy; foster distributed leadership; promote staff engagement; create collaborative relationships; and continuously assess and learn from change. These principles interact with contextual elements such as local power distributions, pre-existing values and beliefs and readiness to engage. Mechanisms influencing how these principles sustain cultural change include activation of a shared sense of urgency and fostering flexible levels of engagement. PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS The principles identified in this review, along with the contexts and mechanisms that influence their effectiveness, are useful domains for policy and practice leaders to explore when grappling with cultural change. These principles are sufficiently broad to allow local flexibilities in adoption and application. ORIGINALITY/VALUE This is the first study to adopt a realist approach for understanding how changes in organizational culture may be sustained. Through doing so, this review highlights the broad principles by which organizational action may be organized within enabling contextual settings.