Simon Carroll

Community-based participatory action research: transforming multidisciplinary practice in primary health care

OBJECTIVES Health care systems throughout the world are in the process of restructuring and reforming their health service delivery systems, reorienting themselves to a primary health care (PHC) model that uses multidisciplinary practice (MDP) teams to provide a range of coordinated, integrated services. This study explores the challenges of putting the MDP approach into practice in one community in a city in Canada. METHODS The data we analyzed were derived from a community-based participatory action research (CBPAR) project, conducted in 2004, that was used to enhance collaborative MDP in a PHC center serving a residential and small-business community of 11,000 within a medium-sized city of approximately 300,000 people in Canada. CBPAR is a planned, systematic approach to issues relevant to the community of interest, requires community involvement, has a problem-solving focus, is directed at societal change, and makes a lasting contribution to the community. We drew from one aspect of this complex, multiyear project aimed at transforming the rhetoric advocating PHC reform into actual sustainable practices. The community studied was diverse with respect to age, socioeconomics, and lifestyle. Its interdisciplinary team serves approximately 3,000 patients annually, 30% of whom are 65 years or older. This PHC centers multidisciplinary, integrated approach to care makes it a member of a very distinct minority within the larger primary care system in Canada. RESULTS Analysis of practice in PHC revealed entrenched and unconscious ideas of the limitations and boundaries of practice. In the rhetoric of PHC, MDP was lauded by many. In practice, however, collaborative, multidisciplinary team approaches to care were difficult to achieve. CONCLUSIONS The successful implementation of an MDP approach to PHC requires moving away from physician-driven care. This can only be achieved once there is a change in the underlying structures, values, power relations, and roles defined by the health care system and the community at large, where physicians are traditionally ranked above other care providers. The CBPAR methodology allows community members and the health-related professionals who serve them to take ownership of the research and to critically reflect on iterative cycles of evaluation. This provides an opportunity for practitioners to implement relevant changes based on internally generated analyses.

Vers un modèle d'évaluation de l'efficacité des interventions communautaires en promotion de la santé : compte-rendu de quelques développements Nord-américains récents1

The current systematic reviews to assess the effectiveness of community-based health promotion projects, be they quantitative (numerical meta-analyses) or qualitative (narrative reviews), both have significant drawbacks. Out of the work conducted for two initiatives, the developments for the Global programme on health promotion effectiveness carried at by the North American Region out of the International Union of Health Promotion and Education (IUHPE), as well as the work conducted for the ECIP (effectiveness of community interventions project) of Health Canada, a new way to approach the issue of effectiveness is proposed. Based on a «realist synthesis» epistemological position, this approach has led us to the first formulation of a framework aiming at identifying the mechanisms that explain why local programs are successful.

Supporting successful implementation of public health interventions: Protocol for a realist synthesis

BackgroundThere is a growing emphasis in public health on the importance of evidence-based interventions to improve population health and reduce health inequities. Equally important is the need for knowledge about how to implement these interventions successfully. Yet, a gap remains between the development of evidence-based public health interventions and their successful implementation. Conventional systematic reviews have been conducted on effective implementation in health care, but few in public health, so their relevance to public health is unclear. In most reviews, stringent inclusion criteria have excluded entire bodies of evidence that may be relevant for policy makers, program planners, and practitioners to understand implementation in the unique public health context. Realist synthesis is a theory-driven methodology that draws on diverse data from different study designs to explain how and why observed outcomes occur in different contexts and thus may be more appropriate for public health.MethodsThis paper presents a realist review protocol to answer the research question: Why are some public health interventions successfully implemented and others not? Based on a review of implementation theories and frameworks, we developed an initial program theory, adapted for public health from the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research, to explain the implementation outcomes of public health interventions within particular contexts. This will guide us through the review process, which comprises eight iterative steps based on established realist review guidelines and quality standards. We aim to refine this initial theory into a ‘final’ realist program theory that explains important context-mechanism-outcome configurations in the successful implementation of public health interventions.DiscussionDeveloping new public health interventions is costly and policy windows that support their implementation can be short lived. Ineffective implementation wastes scarce resources and is neither affordable nor sustainable. Public health interventions that are not implemented will not have their intended effects on improving population health and promoting health equity. This synthesis will provide evidence to support effective implementation of public health interventions taking into account the variable context of interventions. A series of knowledge translation products specific to the needs of knowledge users will be developed to provide implementation support.Systematic review registrationPROSPERO CRD42015030052

Understanding how self-management interventions work for disadvantaged populations living with chronic conditions: protocol for a realist synthesis

Introduction Self-management programmes are complex interventions aimed at improving the way individuals self-manage chronic conditions, but there are questions about the overall impact of these programmes on disadvantaged populations, in terms of their capacity to engage with and receive the benefits from these initiatives. Given the increased resources being directed towards self-management initiatives, clinicians and policy makers need knowledge on how self-management interventions work for these populations. Most systematic reviews of self-management interventions do not consider the complex interactions between implementation contexts, intervention strategies, and mechanisms that influence how self-management interventions work in real life for disadvantaged groups. Methods To address the need for better understanding of these mechanisms and to create context-relevant knowledge, we are conducting a realist synthesis of evidence on self-management interventions for disadvantaged populations living with chronic conditions. The primary research question is: What are the key mechanisms operating in chronic condition self-management interventions among disadvantaged populations? In this protocol, we outline the steps we will take to identify the programme theory for self-management interventions and candidate middle-range theories; to search for evidence in academic and grey literature; to appraise and extract the collected evidence; to synthesise and interpret the findings to generate key context-mechanism-outcome configurations and to disseminate results to relevant stakeholder and to peer-review publications. Dissemination Understandings of how chronic conditions self-management interventions work among disadvantaged populations is essential knowledge for clinicians and other decision makers who need to know which programmes they should implement for which groups. Results will also benefit medical researchers who want to direct effort towards current gaps in knowledge in order to advance the self-management field. In addition, the study will make a contribution to the evolving body of knowledge on the realist synthesis method and, in particular, to its application to behaviour change interventions for disadvantaged populations.

Transatlantic Student Exchange between Canada and Europe: Experiences from the CEIHPAL Project.

International student mobility amongst and between countries has become increasingly common and forms a central feature of the global higher education system. This paper examines the key learning experiences relating to the student mobility component of the Canadian-European Initiative for Health Promotion Advanced Learning (CEIHPAL) project. CEIHPAL was a unique and innovative project that fostered advanced intercontinental education and learning in health promotion from 2005–2008. With co-funding from the European Commission and the Canadian Government, the project facilitated institutional, student and faculty cooperation, by developing a high level of international communication. In particular, this paper focuses on the student mobility component and experiences of the CEIHPAL programme, a central part of the project activities. Feedback from both Canadian and European students themselves is used to document their participation in the programme, including the benefits derived from taking part as well as the problems and difficulties they encountered.

Assets Based Interventions: Evaluating and Synthesizing Evidence of the Effectiveness of the Assets Based Approach to Health Promotion

The chapter is focused mainly on the intervention research and evaluation of actions aimed at strengthening and supporting health assets as a way of producing healthy communities and individuals. There is a need to re-think traditional assumptions related to evaluating the effectiveness of health interventions aimed at strengthening health assets as opposed to eliminating or curing diseases. Working from a concrete example of a 4-year collaborative project in Canada aimed at developing a framework for evaluating the effectiveness of community interventions to promote health and build community capacity. The chapter introduces a series of profound methodological challenges that this type of evaluation research presents, along with a discussion of the attempt to use a ‘realist synthesis’ approach to addressing these challenges.