Adapting a health equity tool to meet professional needs (Québec, Canada)

Exploring health equity integration among health service and delivery systems in Nova Scotia: perspectives of health system partners

BACKGROUND

Achieving health equity is important to improve population health; however, health equity is not typically well defined, integrated, or measured within health service and delivery systems. To improve population health, it is necessary to understand barriers and facilitators to health equity integration within health service and delivery systems. This study aimed to explore health equity integration among health systems workers and identify key barriers and facilitators to implementing health equity strategies within the health service and delivery system in Nova Scotia, ahead of the release of a Health Equity Framework, focused on addressing inequities within publicly funded institutions.

METHODS

Purposive sampling was used to recruit individuals working on health equity initiatives including those in high-level leadership positions within the Nova Scotia health system. Individual interviews and a joint interview session were conducted. Topics of discussion included current integration of health equity through existing strategies and perceptions within participant roles. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) was used to guide coding and analysis, with interviews transcribed and deductively analyzed in NVivo. Qualitative description was employed to describe study findings as barriers and facilitators to health equity integration.

RESULTS

Eleven individual interviews and one joint interview (n = 5 participants) were conducted, a total of 16 participants. Half (n = 8) of the participants were High-level Leaders (i.e., manager or higher) within the health system. We found that existing strategies within the health system were inadequate to address inequities, and variation in the use of indicators of health equity was indicative of a lack of health equity integration. Applying the CFIR allowed us to identify barriers to and facilitators of health equity integration, with the power of legislation to implement a Health Equity Framework, alongside the value of partnerships and engagement both being seen as key facilitators to support health equity integration. Barriers to health equity integration included inadequate resources devoted to health equity work, a lack of diversity among senior system leaders and concerns that existing efforts to integrate health equity were siloed.

CONCLUSION

Our findings suggest that health equity integration needs to be prioritized within the health service and delivery system within Nova Scotia and identifies possible strategies for implementation. Appropriate measures, resources and partnerships need to be put in place to support health equity integration following the introduction of the Health Equity Framework, which was viewed as a key driver for action. Greater diversity within health system leadership was also identified as an important strategy to support integration. Our findings have implications for other jurisdictions seeking to advance health equity across health service and delivery systems.

COVID-19 vaccination at a hospital in Paris: Spatial analyses and inverse equity hypothesis

Background

Vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 has been deployed in France since January 2021. Without specific action for different population subgroups, the inverse equity hypothesis postulates that people in the most deprived neighbourhoods will be the last to benefit. The article aims to study whether the inverse care law has been verified in the context of vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 from a vaccination centre of a hospital in the Paris region.

Methods

We performed a spatial analysis using primary data from the vaccination centre of the Avicenne Hospital in Bobigny from January 8th to September 30th, 2021. Primary data variables include the vaccinated person's date, age, and postal address. Secondary data calculates access times between residential neighbourhoods and the vaccination centre and social deprivation index. We performed flow analysis, k-means aggregation, and mapping.

Results

32,712 people were vaccinated at the study centre. Vaccination flow to the hospital shows that people living in the most disadvantaged areas were the last to be vaccinated. The number of people immunized according to the level of social deprivation then scales out with slightly more access to the vaccination centre for the most advantaged. The furthest have travelled more than 100 km, and more than 1h45 of transport time to get to this vaccination centre.

Conclusion

The study confirms the inverse equity hypothesis and shows that vaccination preparedness strategies must consider equity issues. Public health interventions should be implemented according to proportionate universalism and use community health, health mediation, and outreach activities for more equity.

Did the design and planning of testing and contact tracing interventions for COVID-19 consider social inequalities in health? A multiple case study from Brazil, Canada, France & Mali

The COVID-19 pandemic has led to an unprecedented global crisis. It has exposed and exacerbated weaknesses in public health systems worldwide, particularly with regards to reaching the most vulnerable populations, disproportionately impacted by the pandemic. The objective of our study was to examine whether and how social inequalities in health (SIH) were considered in the design and planning of public health responses to COVID-19 in jurisdictions of Brazil, Canada, France, and Mali. This article reports on a qualitative multiple case study of testing and contact tracing interventions in regions with high COVID-19 incidence in each country, namely: Manaus (Brazil), Montréal (Canada), Île-de-France (France), and Bamako (Mali). We conducted interviews with 108 key informants involved in these interventions in the four jurisdictions, focusing on the first and second waves of the pandemic. We analyzed our data thematically using a theoretical bricolage framework. Our analysis suggests that the lack of a common understanding of SIH among all actors involved and the sense of urgency brought by the pandemic eclipsed the prioritization of SIH in the initial responses. The pandemic increased intersectoral collaboration, but decision-making power was often unequal between Ministries of Health and other actors in each jurisdiction. Various adaptations to COVID-19 interventions were implemented to reach certain population groups, therefore improving the accessibility, availability, and acceptability of testing and contact tracing. Our study contributes to identifying lessons learned from the current pandemic, namely that the ways in which SIH are understood shape how interventions are planned; that having clear guidelines on how to integrate SIH into public health interventions could lead to more inclusive pandemic responses; that for intersectoral collaboration to be fruitful, there needs to be sufficient resources and equitable decision-making power between partners; and that interventions must be flexible to respond to emerging needs while considering long-standing structural inequalities.

"It felt like building a plane while in flight": the consideration of social inequalities in the design and planning of a contact-tracing intervention for COVID-19 in Montreal, Quebec

OBJECTIVE

In Canada and globally, the COVID-19 pandemic has increased social inequalities in health (SIH), furthering the vulnerability of certain groups and communities. Contact-tracing is a cornerstone intervention with COVID-19 prevention and control programs. The aim of this study was to describe whether and how SIH were considered during the design of the COVID-19 contact-tracing intervention in Montreal.

METHODS

This study is part of the multi-country research program HoSPiCOVID, looking at the resilience of public health systems during the COVID-19 pandemic. A descriptive qualitative study was carried out in Montreal, based on a "bricolage" conceptual framework describing the consideration for SIH in intervention and policy design. Qualitative data were collected using semi-structured interviews with 16 public health practitioners, recruited using both purposive and snowball sampling. Data were analyzed thematically, both inductively and deductively.

RESULTS

According to participants, SIH were not initially considered during the design of the contract-tracing intervention in Montreal. The participants were frustrated by the Minister of Health's initial resistance to integrating SIH into their public health response. However, adaptations were gradually made to better meet the needs of underserved populations.

CONCLUSION

There is a need for a clear and common vision of SIH within the public health system. Decision-makers need to consider SIH prior to designing public health interventions in order for these not to further increase SIH in the future, especially in the face of a health crisis.

Considering social inequalities in health in COVID-19 response: insights from a French case study

The COVID-19 pandemic highlighted the impact of social inequalities in health (SIH). Various studies have shown significant inequalities in mortality and morbidity associated with COVID-19 and the influence of social determinants of health. The objective of this qualitative case study was to analyze the consideration of SIH in the design of two key COVID-19 prevention and control interventions in France: testing and contact tracing. Interviews were conducted with 36 key informants involved in the design of the intervention and/or the government response to the pandemic as well as relevant documents (n = 15) were reviewed. We applied data triangulation and a hybrid deductive and inductive analysis to analyze the data. Findings revealed the divergent understandings and perspectives about SIH, as well as the challenges associated with consideration for these at the beginning stages of the pandemic. Despite a shared concern for SIH between the participants, an epidemiological frame of reference dominated the design of the intervention. It resulted in a model in which consideration for SIH appeared as a complement, with a clinical goal of the intervention: breaking the chain of COVID-19 transmission. Although the COVID-19 health crisis highlighted the importance of SIH, it did not appear to be an opportunity to further their consideration in response efforts. This article provides original insights into consideration for SIH in the design of testing and contact-tracing interventions based upon a qualitative investigation.

The updated Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research based on user feedback

BACKGROUND

Many implementation efforts fail, even with highly developed plans for execution, because contextual factors can be powerful forces working against implementation in the real world. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) is one of the most commonly used determinant frameworks to assess these contextual factors; however, it has been over 10 years since publication and there is a need for updates. The purpose of this project was to elicit feedback from experienced CFIR users to inform updates to the framework.

METHODS

User feedback was obtained from two sources: (1) a literature review with a systematic search; and (2) a survey of authors who used the CFIR in a published study. Data were combined across both sources and reviewed to identify themes; a consensus approach was used to finalize all CFIR updates. The VA Ann Arbor Healthcare System IRB declared this study exempt from the requirements of 38 CFR 16 based on category 2.

RESULTS

The systematic search yielded 376 articles that contained the CFIR in the title and/or abstract and 334 unique authors with contact information; 59 articles included feedback on the CFIR. Forty percent (n = 134/334) of authors completed the survey. The CFIR received positive ratings on most framework sensibility items (e.g., applicability, usability), but respondents also provided recommendations for changes. Overall, updates to the CFIR include revisions to existing domains and constructs as well as the addition, removal, or relocation of constructs. These changes address important critiques of the CFIR, including better centering innovation recipients and adding determinants to equity in implementation.

CONCLUSION

The updates in the CFIR reflect feedback from a growing community of CFIR users. Although there are many updates, constructs can be mapped back to the original CFIR to ensure longitudinal consistency. We encourage users to continue critiquing the CFIR, facilitating the evolution of the framework as implementation science advances.

Considering social inequalities in health in large-scale testing for COVID-19 in Montréal: a qualitative case study

BACKGROUND

Evidence continues to demonstrate that certain marginalised populations are disproportionately affected by COVID-19. While many studies document the impacts of COVID-19 on social inequalities in health, none has examined how public health responses to the pandemic have unfolded to address these inequities in Canada. The purpose of our study was to assess how social inequalities in health were considered in the design and planning of large-scale COVID-19 testing programs in Montréal (Québec, Canada).

METHODS

Part of the multicountry study HoSPiCOVID, this article reports on a qualitative case study of large-scale testing for COVID-19 in Montréal. We conducted semi-structured interviews with 19 stakeholders involved in planning large-scale testing or working with vulnerable populations during the pandemic. We developed interview guides and a codebook using existing literature on policy design and planning, and analysed data deductively and inductively using thematic analysis in NVivo.

RESULTS

Our findings suggest that large-scale COVID-19 testing in Montréal did not initially consider social inequalities in health in its design and planning phases. Considering the sense of urgency brought by the pandemic, participants noted the challenges linked to the uptake of an intersectoral approach and of a unified vision of social inequalities in health. However, adaptations were gradually made to large-scale testing to improve its accessibility, acceptability, and availability. Actors from the community sector, among others, played an important role in supporting the health sector to address the needs of specific subgroups of the population.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings contribute to the reflections on the lessons learned from COVID-19, highlighting that public health programs must tackle structural barriers to accessing healthcare services during health crises. This will be necessary to ensure that pandemic preparedness and response, including large-scale testing, do not further increase social inequalities in health.

Findings from a scoping review

OBJECTIVE

This scoping review aimed to identify how equity has been considered in large-scale infectious disease testing initiatives.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

Large-scale testing interventions are instrumental for infectious disease control and a central tool for the coronavirus 19 (COVID-19) pandemic. We searched Web of Science: core collection, Embase and Medline in June 2021 and followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses recommendations for scoping reviews. We critically analyzed the content of all included articles.

RESULTS

Our search resulted in 2448 studies of which 86 were included for data extraction after screening. Of the included articles, 80% reported on COVID-19 -related screening programs. None of the studies presented a formal definition of (in)equity in testing, however, 71 articles did indirectly include elements of equity through the justification of their target population. Of these 71 studies, 58% articles indirectly alluded to health equity according to the PROGRESS-Plus framework, an acronym used to identify a list of socially stratifying characteristics driving inequity in health outcomes.

CONCLUSION

The studies included in our scoping review did not explicitly consider equity in their design or evaluation which is imperative for the success of infectious disease testing programs.

Learning from public health and hospital resilience to the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic: protocol for a multiple case study (Brazil, Canada, China, France, Japan, and Mali)

BACKGROUND

All prevention efforts currently being implemented for COVID-19 are aimed at reducing the burden on strained health systems and human resources. There has been little research conducted to understand how SARS-CoV-2 has affected health care systems and professionals in terms of their work. Finding effective ways to share the knowledge and insight between countries, including lessons learned, is paramount to the international containment and management of the COVID-19 pandemic. The aim of this project is to compare the pandemic response to COVID-19 in Brazil, Canada, China, France, Japan, and Mali. This comparison will be used to identify strengths and weaknesses in the response, including challenges for health professionals and health systems.

METHODS

We will use a multiple case study approach with multiple levels of nested analysis. We have chosen these countries as they represent different continents and different stages of the pandemic. We will focus on several major hospitals and two public health interventions (contact tracing and testing). It will employ a multidisciplinary research approach that will use qualitative data through observations, document analysis, and interviews, as well as quantitative data based on disease surveillance data and other publicly available data. Given that the methodological approaches of the project will be largely qualitative, the ethical risks are minimal. For the quantitative component, the data being used will be made publicly available.

DISCUSSION

We will deliver lessons learned based on a rigorous process and on strong evidence to enable operational-level insight for national and international stakeholders.

Implementation and evaluation of nonclinical interventions for appropriate use of cesarean section in low- and middle-income countries: protocol for a multisite hybrid effectiveness-implementation type III trial

Background

While cesarean sections (CSs) are a life-saving intervention, an increasing number are performed without medical reasons in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Unnecessary CS diverts scarce resources and thereby reduces access to healthcare for women in need. Argentina, Burkina Faso, Thailand, and Vietnam are committed to reducing unnecessary CS, but many individual and organizational factors in healthcare facilities obstruct this aim. Nonclinical interventions can overcome these barriers by helping providers improve their practices and supporting women’s decision-making regarding childbirth. Existing evidence has shown only a modest effect of single interventions on reducing CS rates, arguably because of the failure to design multifaceted interventions effectively tailored to the context. The aim of this study is to design, adapt, and test a multifaceted intervention for the appropriate use of CS in Argentina, Burkina Faso, Thailand, and Vietnam.

Methods

We designed an intervention (QUALIty DECision-making—QUALI-DEC) with four components: (1) opinion leaders at heathcare facilities to improve adherence to best practices among clinicians, (2) CS audits and feedback to help providers identify potentially avoidable CS, (3) a decision analysis tool to help women make an informed decision on the mode of birth, and (4) companionship to support women during labor. QUALI-DEC will be implemented and evaluated in 32 hospitals (8 sites per country) using a pragmatic hybrid effectiveness-implementation design to test our implementation strategy, and information regarding its impact on relevant maternal and perinatal outcomes will be gathered. The implementation strategy will involve the participation of women, healthcare professionals, and organizations and account for the local environment, needs, resources, and social factors in each country.

Discussion

There is urgent need for interventions and implementation strategies to optimize the use of CS while improving health outcomes and satisfaction in LMICs. This can only be achieved by engaging all stakeholders involved in the decision-making process surrounding birth and addressing their needs and concerns. The study will generate robust evidence about the effectiveness and the impact of this multifaceted intervention. It will also assess the acceptability and scalability of the intervention and the capacity for empowerment among women and providers alike.

Trial registration

ISRCTN67214403

Towards a better integration of social sciences in arbovirus research and decision-making: an experience from scientific collaboration between Cuban and Quebec institutions

In 2017, the Institute of Tropical Medicine Pedro Kourí, University of Montreal Public Health Research Institute, and McGill University joined efforts to provide scenarios for scientific exchange and knowledge dissemination about the social science contribution on arboviral research. This commentary describes the scientific collaboration between Cuban and Canadian (Quebec) institutions, illustrating the need and opportunities to facilitate research and effective decision-making processes for arboviral prevention and control, going beyond traditional biomedical aspects. We organized a set of scientific activities within three international events conducted in Cuba between 2017 and 2018. Given the collaborating institutions' expertise and the knowledge gaps in arboviral research, we selected three main thematic areas: social determinants and equity, community-based interventions and use of evidence for decision-making. The partnership shows that interdisciplinary collaboration and the use and integration of quantitative and qualitative methods from the social sciences is essential to face the current challenges in arbovirus research.

Health Equity’s Missing Substance: (Re)Engaging the Normative in Public Health Discourse and Knowledge Making

Since 1984, the idea of health equity has proliferated throughout public health discourse with little mainstream critique for its variability and distance from its original articulation signifying social transformation and a commitment to social justice. In the years since health equity’s emergence and proliferation, it has taken on a seemingly endless range of invocations and deployments, but it most often translates into proactive and apolitical discourse and practice. In Margaret Whitehead’s influential characterization (1991), achieving health equity requires determining what is inequitable by examining and judging the causes of inequalities in the context of what is going on in the rest of society. However, it also remains unclear how or if public health actors examine and judge the causes of health inequality. In this article, we take the concept of health equity itself as an object of study and consider the ways in which its widespread deployment has entailed a considerable emptying of its semantic and political content. We point toward equity’s own discursive productivity as well as the quantifying imperative embedded within evidentiary norms that govern knowledge making, and performance management regimes that govern public health practices. Under current conditions of knowledge making and performance evaluation, a range of legitimate action and inaction is produced at the same time that more socially transformative action is legitimately curtailed—not merely by politics, but by the rules of the field in which public health actors work. Ultimately, meaningful progress on a normative ethical idea like health equity will require both substantial philosophical content and an analysis of what is going on in the rest of society.

Reflexivity in Health Promotion: A Typology for Training

Reflexivity has emerged as a key concept in the field of health promotion (HP). Yet it remains unclear how diverse forms of reflexivity are specifically relevant to HP concerns, and how these “reflexivities” are interconnected. We argue that frameworks are needed to support more systematic integration of reflexivity in HP training and practice. In this article, we propose a typology of reflexivity in HP to facilitate the understanding of reflexivity in professional training. Drawing from key theories and models of reflexivity, this typology proposes three reflexive positions (ideal-types) with specific purposes for HP: reflexivity in, on, and underlying action. This article illustrates our typology’s ideal-types with vignettes collected from HP actors working with reflexivity in North America and Europe. We suggest that our typology constitutes a conceptual device to organize and discuss a variety of experiences of engaging with reflexivity for HP. We propose the typology may support integrating reflexivity as a key feature in training a future cadre of health promoters and as a means for building a responsible HP practice.

Equity at all cost-and any price-for research funding in Canada?

This commentary is in response to the May 2018 announcement by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) of a new procedure to ensure fairer access to health research funding for participants. As such, all applicants to CIHR's funding programs will now be required to complete a five-question questionnaire covering the dimensions of gender, age, Indigenous origin, visible minorities, and disability. On this basis, CIHR intends to gain a better understanding of the performance of its funding programs in terms of equity. In this commentary, we wish to question the theoretical and conceptual assumptions of a vision of equity framed principally in terms of diversity upstream from the research process as a founding principle of more equitable health research in Canada. We draw attention to the fact that diversity policies do not necessarily challenge inequity in research funding or in research projects. Having established the urgent need for action on equity to improve the health of populations, we recall the ethical responsibility of research and researchers to better take the various facets of equity in research into account. We recommend expanding efforts to understand and reflexively address both equity and diversity when considering the performance of population health research programs.