Systems antecedents for dissemination and implementation: a review and analysis of measures

Fostering more-effective public health by identifying administrative evidence-based practices: a review of the literature

CONTEXT

The aim of evidence-based decision-making in public health involves the integration of science-based interventions with community preferences to improve population health. Although considerable literature is available on the development and adoption of evidence-based guidelines and barriers to their implementation, the evidence base specific to public health administration is less developed. This article reviews the literature from public health and related disciplines to identify administrative evidence-based practices (A-EBPs; i.e., agency-level structures and activities that are positively associated with performance measures).

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

A "review of reviews" was carried out to assess the evidence for the effectiveness of A-EBPs covering the time frame January 2000 through March 2012. The following steps were used: (1) select databases; (2) determine search parameters and conduct the search; (3) screen titles and abstracts; (4) obtain selected documents; (5) perform initial synthesis; (6) abstract data; and (7) synthesize evidence.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

In both the reviews and original empiric studies, the most common outcome reported was performance of the local health department or local public health system. On the basis of a synthesis of data from 20 reviews, a total of 11 high-priority A-EBPs were identified (i.e., practices that local public health systems potentially can modify within a few years). The A-EBPs covered five major domains of workforce development, leadership, organizational climate and culture, relationships and partnerships, and financial processes.

CONCLUSIONS

As the body of practice-based research continues to grow and the ability to measure administrative evidence-based practices improves, this initial list can be further developed and improved.

Multilevel interventions and racial/ethnic health disparities

To examine the impact of multilevel interventions (with three or more levels of influence) designed to reduce health disparities, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of interventions for ethnic/racial minorities (all except non-Hispanic whites) that were published between January 2000 and July 2011. The primary aims were to synthesize the findings of studies evaluating multilevel interventions (three or more levels of influence) targeted at ethnic and racial minorities to reduce disparities in their health care and obtain a quantitative estimate of the effect of multilevel interventions on health outcomes among these subgroups. The electronic database PubMed was searched using Medical Subject Heading terms and key words. After initial review of abstracts, 26 published studies were systematically reviewed by at least two independent coders. Those with sufficient data (n = 12) were assessed by meta-analysis and examined for quality using a modified nine-item Physiotherapy Evidence Database coding scheme. The findings from this descriptive review suggest that multilevel interventions have positive effects on several health behavior outcomes, including cancer prevention and screening, as well improving the quality of health-care system processes. The weighted average effect size across studies for all health behavior outcomes reported at the individual participant level (k = 17) was odds ratio (OR) = 1.27 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.11 to 1.44); for the outcomes reported by providers or organizations, the weighted average effect size (k = 3) was OR = 2.53 (95% CI = 0.82 to 7.81). Enhanced application of theories to multiple levels of change, novel design approaches, and use of cultural leveraging in intervention design and implementation are proposed for this nascent field.