Page Avenue health impact assessment: building on diverse partnerships and evidence to promote a healthy community

Walkability and urban built environments-a systematic review of health impact assessments (HIA)

BACKGROUND

Urban environments are important determinants of human health. The term walkability summarizes features of the urban built environment that promote walking and other types of physical activity. While the beneficial effects of active and public transport have been well established, the health impact of other features of walkability are less well documented.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review of health impact assessments (HIAs) of walkability. Studies were identified through PUBMED and Science Direct, from two German websites related to urban health and reference tracking. Finally, 40 studies were included in the present review. We applied qualitative thematic analysis to summarize the major results from these studies.

RESULTS

Most of the HIAs (n = 31) reported the improvement of health or health behaviour resulting from an investigated project or policy. However, three HIAs reported a lack of improvement or even a decrease of health status. In parallel, 13 HIAs reported a gain in economic value, whereas one reported a lack or loss of economic effects. Moreover, three HIAs reported on social effects and six HIAs gave additional recommendations for policies or the implementation of projects or HIAs.

CONCLUSIONS

Most HIAs investigate the impact of increasing active or public transport. Other features of walkability are less well studied. With few exceptions, HIAs document beneficial impacts of improving walkability on a variety of health outcomes, including reductions of mortality and non-communicable diseases.

Implementation of Health Impact Assessment in the Healthcare System of the Republic of Kazakhstan

The Health Impact Assessment (hereinafter referred to as HIA) is an effective method for predicting potential health impacts from decisions. Little is known about the implementation of the HIA in the Republic of Kazakhstan (further, RK). In addition, the Russian language literature has not yet been reviewed in terms of HIA-related knowledge. By conducting a literature review of enabling factors, including Russian language literature, on the implementation of the HIA and studying governance systems in RK, we aim to suggest an implementation process to implement the HIA in RK. After careful analysis of the governance system, we suggest set up of a HIA support unit under the National Scientific Center for Health Development and discuss the possible benefits. The proposed center should guide the implementation of the HIA in RK.

Systematic Literature Review of Health Impact Assessments in Low and Middle-Income Countries

Health Impact Assessments (HIAs) motivate effective measures for safeguarding public health. There is consensus that HIAs in low and middle-income countries (LMICs) are lacking, but no study systematically focuses on those that have been successfully conducted across all regions of the world, nor do they highlight factors that may enable or hinder their implementation. Our objectives are to (1) systematically review, geographically map, and characterize HIA activity in LMICs; and (2) apply a process evaluation method to identify factors which are important to improve HIA implementation in LMICs. A systematic review of peer-reviewed HIAs in 156 LMICs was performed in Scopus, Medline, Web of Science, Sociological abstracts, and LILACs (Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences) databases. The search used PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines and covered HIAs across all type of interventions, topics, and health outcomes. HIAs were included if they reported a clear intervention and health outcome to be assessed. No time restriction was applied, and grey literature was not included. The eligible studies were subjected to six process evaluation criteria. The search yielded 3178 hits and 57 studies were retained. HIAs were conducted in 26 out of 156 countries. There was an unequal distribution of HIAs across regions and within LMICs countries. The leading topics of HIA in LMICs were air pollution, development projects, and urban transport planning. Most of the HIAs reported quantitative approaches (72%), focused on air pollution (46%), appraised policies (60%), and were conducted at the city level (36%). The process evaluation showed important variations in the way HIAs have been conducted and low uniformity in the reporting of six criteria. No study reported the time, money, and staff used to perform HIAs. Only 12% of HIAs were based on participatory approaches; 92% of HIAs considered multiple outcomes; and 61% of HIAs provided recommendations and fostered cross-national collaboration. The limited transparency in process, weak participation, and inconsistent delivery of recommendations were potential limitations to HIA implementation in low and middle-income countries. Scaling and improving HIA implementation in low and middle-income countries in the upcoming years will depend on expanding geographically by increasing HIA governance, adapting models and tools in quantitative methods, and adopting better reporting practices.

Effectiveness of Health Impact Assessments: A Synthesis of Data From Five Impact Evaluation Reports

Introduction

Since the 1990s, the use of health impact assessments (HIAs) has grown for considering the potential health impacts of proposed policies, plans, programs, and projects in various sectors. Evaluation of HIA impacts is needed for understanding the value of HIAs, improving the methods involved in HIAs, and potentially expanding their application. Impact evaluations examine whether HIAs affect decisions and lead to other effects.

Methods

I reviewed HIA impact evaluations identified by literature review and professional networking. I abstracted and synthesized data on key findings, success factors, and challenges from 5 large evaluations conducted in the United States, Europe, Australia, and New Zealand and published from 2006 through 2015. These studies analyzed impacts of approximately 200 individual HIAs.

Results

Major impacts of HIAs were directly influencing some decisions, improving collaboration among stakeholders, increasing awareness of health issues among decision makers, and giving community members a stronger voice in local decisions. Factors that contributed to successful HIAs included engaging stakeholders, timeliness, policy and systems support for conducting HIAs, having people with appropriate skills on the HIA team, obtaining the support of decision makers, and providing clearly articulated, feasible recommendations. Challenges that may have reduced HIA success were poor timeliness, underestimation of time and resources needed, difficulty in accessing relevant data, use of jargon in HIA reports, difficulty in involving decision makers in the HIA process, and absence of a requirement to conduct HIAs.

Conclusion

HIAs can be useful to promote health and mitigate adverse impacts of decisions made outside of the health sector. Stakeholder interactions and community engagement may be as important as direct impacts of HIAs. Multiple factors are required for HIA success. Further work could strengthen the role of HIAs in promoting equity, examine HIA impacts in specific sectors, and document the role of HIAs in a “health in all policies” approach.

Predicting urban design effects on physical activity and public health: A case study

With increasing global concerns about obesity and related health effects, tools to predict how urban form affects population physical activity and health are needed. However, such tools have not been well established. This article develops a computer simulation model for forecasting the health effects of urban features that promote walking. The article demonstrates the model using a proposed small-area plan for a neighborhood of 10,400 residents in Raleigh, North Carolina, one of the fastest-growing and most sprawling U.S. cities. The simulation model predicts that the plan would increase average daily time spent walking for transportation by 17 min. As a result, annual deaths from all causes are predicted to decrease by 5.5%. Annual new cases of diabetes, coronary heart disease, stroke, and hypertension are predicted to decline by 1.9%, 2.3%, 1.3%, and 1.6%, respectively. The present value of these health benefits is $21,000 per resident.

An evaluation of health impact assessments in the United States, 2011-2014

Introduction

The Center for Community Health and Evaluation conducted a 3-year evaluation to assess results of health impact assessments (HIAs) in the United States and to identify elements critical for their success.

Methods

The study used a retrospective, mixed-methods comparative case study design, including a literature review; site visits; interviews with investigators, stakeholders, and decision makers for 23 HIAs in 16 states that were completed from 2005 through 2013; and a Web-based survey of 144 HIA practitioners.

Results

Analysis of interviews with decision makers suggests HIAs can directly influence decisions in nonhealth-related sectors. HIAs may also influence changes beyond the decision target, build consensus and relationships among decision makers and their constituents, and give community members a stronger voice in decisions that affect them. Factors that may increase HIA success include care in choosing a project or policy to be examined’ selecting an appropriate team to conduct the HIA; engaging stakeholders and decision makers throughout the process; crafting clear, actionable recommendations; delivering timely, compelling messages to appropriate audiences; and using multiple dissemination methods. Challenges to successful HIAs include underestimating the level of effort required, political changes during the conduct of the HIA, accessing relevant local data, engaging vulnerable populations, and following up on recommendations.

Conclusion

Results of this study suggest HIAs are a useful tool to promote public health because they can influence decisions in nonhealth-related sectors, strengthen cross-sector collaborations, and raise awareness of health issues among decision makers.