Using a cross-contextual reciprocal learning approach in a multisite implementation research project to improve self-management for type 2 diabetes

Scaling up integrated care for chronic diseases in belgium: A process evaluation

INTRODUCTION

Few integrated care studies elaborate how interventions are brought to wider scale. The SCUBY project developed interventions for scale-up of an Integrated Care Package (ICP) for two common diseases - type 2 diabetes and hypertension-, comprising evidence-based roadmaps and policy dialogues. This paper's aim is to report on the process evaluation of the ICP scale-up in Belgium. Specific objectives are: to describe the development of scale-up interventions; to assess the actual process outcomes; and to assess progress on three scale-up dimensions coverage, expansion and institutionalisation.

METHODS

A case study design, with data collection including project diaries, stakeholder surveys and interviews. 11 Key informant interviews were held with five research team members and six external people. Tools were developed to visualise progress for coverage, institutionalisation and expansion.

RESULTS

The roadmap included three themes: primary care practice organization, data and monitoring, and healthcare financing. 99 policy dialogues of varying size and type were held. Stakeholders rated all themes relevant. For scale-up outcomes, progress was most on the institutionalization axis.

DISCUSSION

Scale-up of ICP demands a collaborative, networking approach to build trust and buy-in. Protagonists need to strike a balance between relevance and feasibility of scale-up strategies, being aware of context elasticity. A roadmap can be a living document serving change teams in communication, planning and monitoring, while allowing intervention plasticity.

Global health reciprocal innovation: ethical, legal and regulatory considerations

Global health reciprocal innovation (GHRI) is a recent and more formalised approach to conducting research that recognises and develops innovations (eg, medicines, devices, methodologies) from low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). At present, studies using GHRI most commonly adapt innovations from LMICs for use in high-income countries (HICs), although some develop innovations in LMICs and HICs. In this paper, we propose that GHRI implicitly makes two ethical commitments: (1) to promote health innovations from LMICs, especially in HICs, and (2) to conduct studies on health innovations from LMICs in equitable partnerships between investigators in LMICs and HICs. We argue that these commitments take a significant step towards a more equal global health research enterprise while helping to ensure that populations and investigators in LMICs receive equitable benefits from studies using GHRI. However, studies using GHRI can raise potential ethical concerns and face legal and regulatory barriers. We propose ethical, legal and regulatory considerations to help address these concerns and barriers. We hope our recommendations will allow GHRI to move the global health research enterprise forward into an era where all people are treated equally as knowers and learners, while populations in both LMICs and HICs benefit equitably from studies using GHRI.

Lifting all boats: strategies to promote equitable bidirectional research training opportunities to enhance global health reciprocal innovation

Inequities in global health research are well documented. For example, training opportunities for US investigators to conduct research in low-income and middle-income countries (LMIC) have exceeded opportunities for LMIC investigators to train and conduct research in high-income countries. Reciprocal innovation addresses these inequities through collaborative research across diverse global settings.The Fogarty International Center of the US National Institutes of Health (NIH) promotes research capacity building in LMICs. Fogarty K-grants for mentored career development in global health are available for both US and LMIC investigators, whereas the D43 is the standard grant to support institutional training programmes in LMIC. Other NIH institutes fund T32 training grants to support biomedical research training in the USA, but very few have any global health component. Most global health training partnerships have historically focused on research conducted solely in LMIC, with few examples of bidirectional training partnerships. Opportunities may exist to promote global health reciprocal innovation (GHRI) research by twinning K-awardees in the USA with those from LMIC or by intentionally creating partnerships between T32 and D43 training programmes.To sustain independent careers in GHRI research, trainees must be supported through the path to independence known as the K (mentored grantee)-to-R (independent grantee) transition. Opportunities to support this transition include comentorship, research training at both LMIC and US institutions and protected time and resources for research. Other opportunities for sustainability include postdoctoral training before and after the K-award period, absorption of trained researchers into home institutions, South-South training initiatives and innovations to mitigate brain drain.

Reversing the trend: a scoping review of health innovation transfer or exchange from low- and middle-income countries to high-income countries

The transfer of innovations from low and middle-income countries (LMICs) to high-income countries (HICs) has received little attention, leaving gaps in the understanding of the process, its benefits and the factors influencing it. This scoping review, part of a National Institutes of Health (NIH) project and the focus for a 2022 NIH-sponsored workshop on Global Health Reciprocal Innovation, sought to identify publications describing health innovations that were researched, developed and implemented in LMICs and adapted to address similar health challenges in HICs. A protocol was written a priori and registered on Open Science Framework. Four databases were searched for articles published in English from 2000 to 2022 and described health innovations developed in LMICs and were transferred to HICs. Using Covidence, two reviewers initially screened the title and abstract and then the full text; discrepancies were resolved through discussion. Two reviewers collected the data from each article using Covidence and Microsoft Excel; discrepancies were resolved by a separate third reviewer. 7191 records were retrieved and screened of which 12 studies were included. Various frameworks and methodologies were employed in these studies, with a particular emphasis on adaptation and adoption of innovations. The review uncovered different paradigms of LMIC to HIC innovation transfer and exchange, including unidirectional transfers from LMICs to HICs as well as bidirectional or multidirectional mutually beneficial exchanges. The use of both qualitative and quantitative data collection methods was common across all the included articles. Facilitators for innovation transfers included stakeholder engagement, relevance of local context, simplicity, and sufficient funding, promotion and branding. Barriers to transfers were mostly the opposite of the facilitators. Our results highlighted the underexplored field of LMIC to HIC innovation transfer and exchange and lay the foundation for future research studies.

Reciprocal coproduction as a basis for the diffusion of global health innovations

Global health reciprocal innovations originate in low-income and middle-income countries as well as high-income countries before their developers communicate about them with potential adopters in other countries as a transnational team. While communication technology has enabled a more rapid and broader sharing of information about innovations to prevent disease and improve health, innovations of various types have spread among countries, at all levels of income, for many centuries. In this article, we introduce the idea of reciprocal coproduction as a basis for the international sharing of information about innovations that exhibit potential for improving global health. Reciprocal coproduction occurs through two relational team-based processes: developer-led reinvention of an innovation so that it retains its desirable causal effects and implementer-led adaptation of that innovation so that it is compatible with new contexts into which it is introduced. Drawing on research and our own experiences across a range of health issues, we discuss common barriers to reciprocal coproduction and the diffusion of reciprocal innovations. We conclude with lessons drawn from dissemination and implementation science about the effective translation of reciprocal innovations from country to country so that researchers, policy-makers and social entrepreneurs can best ensure equity, accelerate adoptions and heighten the likelihood that global health reciprocal innovations will make a positive difference in health.

Implementing community based inclusive development for people with disability in Latin America: a mixed methods perspective on prioritized needs and lessons learned

BACKGROUND

Research on the needs of people with disability is scarce, which promotes inadequate programs. Community Based Inclusive Development interventions aim to promote rights but demand a high level of community participation. This study aimed to identify prioritized needs as well as lessons learned for successful project implementation in different Latin American communities.

METHODS

This study was based on a Community Based Inclusive Development project conducted from 2018 to 2021 led by a Columbian team in Columbia, Brazil and Bolivia. Within a sequential mixed methods design, we first retrospectively analyzed the project baseline data and then conducted Focus Group Discussions, together with ratings of community participation levels. Quantitative descriptive and between group analysis of the baseline survey were used to identify and compare sociodemographic characteristics and prioritized needs of participating communities. We conducted qualitative thematic analysis on Focus Group Discussions, using deductive main categories for triangulation: 1) prioritized needs and 2) lessons learned, with subcategories project impact, facilitators, barriers and community participation. Community participation was assessed via spidergrams. Key findings were compared with triangulation protocols.

RESULTS

A total of 348 people with disability from 6 urban settings participated in the baseline survey, with a mean age of 37.6 years (SD 23.8). Out of these, 18 participated within the four Focus Group Discussions. Less than half of the survey participants were able to read and calculate (42.0%) and reported knowledge on health care routes (46.0%). Unemployment (87.9%) and inadequate housing (57.8%) were other prioritized needs across countries. Focus Group Discussions revealed needs within health, education, livelihood, social and empowerment domains. Participants highlighted positive project impact in work inclusion, self-esteem and ability for self-advocacy. Facilitators included individual leadership, community networks and previous reputation of participating organizations. Barriers against successful project implementation were inadequate contextualization, lack of resources and on-site support, mostly due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The overall level of community participation was high (mean score 4.0/5) with lower levels in Brazil (3.8/5) and Bolivia (3.2/5).

CONCLUSION

People with disability still face significant needs. Community Based Inclusive Development can initiate positive changes, but adequate contextualization and on-site support should be assured.

Process evaluation of a pragmatic implementation trial to support self-management for the prevention and management of type 2 diabetes in Uganda, South Africa and Sweden in the SMART2D project

INTRODUCTION

Type 2 diabetes (T2D) and its complications are increasing rapidly. Support for healthy lifestyle and self-management is paramount, but not adequately implemented in health systems. Process evaluations facilitate understanding why and how interventions work through analyzing the interaction between intervention theory, implementation and context. The Self-Management and Reciprocal Learning for Type 2 Diabetes project implemented and evaluated community-based interventions (peer support program; care companion; and link between facility care and community support) for persons at high risk of or having T2D in a rural community in Uganda, an urban township in South Africa, and socioeconomically disadvantaged urban communities in Sweden.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

This paper reports implementation process outcomes across the three sites, guided by the Medical Research Council framework for complex intervention process evaluations. Data were collected through observations of peer support group meetings using a structured guide, and semistructured interviews with project managers, implementers, and participants.

RESULTS

The countries aligned implementation in accordance with the feasibility and relevance in the local context. In Uganda and Sweden, the implementation focused on peer support; in South Africa, it focused on the care companion part. The community-facility link received the least attention. Continuous capacity building received a lot of attention, but intervention reach, dose delivered, and fidelity varied substantially. Intervention-related and context-related barriers affected participation.

CONCLUSIONS

Identification of the key uncertainties and conditions facilitates focus and efficient use of resources in process evaluations, and context relevant findings. The use of an overarching framework allows to collect cross-contextual evidence and flexibility in evaluation design to adapt to the complex nature of the intervention. When designing interventions, it is crucial to consider aspects of the implementing organization or structure, its absorptive capacity, and to thoroughly assess and discuss implementation feasibility, capacity and organizational context with the implementation team and recipients. These recommendations are important for implementation and scale-up of complex interventions.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ISRCTN11913581.

Proportionate translation of study materials and measures in a multinational global health trial: methodology development and implementation

OBJECTIVES

Current translation guidelines do not include sufficiently flexible translation approaches for different study materials. We aimed to develop a proportionate methodology to inform translation of all types of study materials in global health trials.

DESIGN

The design included three stages: (1) categorisation of study materials, (2) integration of existing translation frameworks and (3) methodology implementation (Germany, India, Israel, Tanzania and Uganda) and refinement.

PARTICIPANTS

The study population comprised 27 mental health service users and 27 mental health workers who were fluent in the local language in stage 7 (pretesting), and 54 bilingual mental health service users, aged 18 years or over, and able to give consent as judged by a clinician for step 9 (psychometric evaluation).

SETTING

The study took place in preparation for the Using Peer Support in Developing Empowering Mental Health Services (UPSIDES) randomised controlled trial (ISRCTN26008944).

PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURE

The primary outcome measure was the Social Inclusion Scale (SIS).

RESULTS

The typology identifies four categories of study materials: local text, study-generated text, secondary measures and primary measure. The UPSIDES Proportionate Translation Methodology comprises ten steps: preparation, forward translation, reconciliation, back translation, review, harmonisation, pretesting, finalisation, psychometric evaluation and dissemination. The translated primary outcome measure for the UPSIDES Trial (SIS) demonstrated adequate content validity (49.3 vs 48.5, p=0.08), convergent validity and internal consistency (0.73), with minimal floor/ceiling effects.

CONCLUSION

This methodology can be recommended for translating, cross-culturally adapting and validating all study materials, including standardised measures, in future multisite global trials. The methodology is particularly applicable to multi-national studies involving sites with differing resource levels. The robustness of the psychometric findings is limited by the sample sizes for each site. However, making this limitation explicit is preferable to the typical practice of not reporting adequate details about measure translation and validation.

TRAIL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ISRCTN26008944.

SMART2D-development and contextualization of community strategies to support self-management in prevention and control of type 2 diabetes in Uganda, South Africa, and Sweden

Type 2 diabetes (T2D) and its complications are increasing rapidly in low- and middle-income countries, as well as among socioeconomically disadvantaged populations in high-income countries. Support for healthy lifestyle and self-management is paramount but not well implemented in health systems, and there is need for knowledge on how to design and implement interventions that are contextualized and patient centered and address special needs of disadvantaged population groups. The SMART2D project implements and evaluates a lifestyle and self-management intervention for participants recently diagnosed with or being at increased risk for T2D in rural communities in Uganda, an urban township in South Africa, and socioeconomically disadvantaged urban communities in Sweden. Our aim was to develop an intervention with shared key functions and a good fit with the local context, needs, and resources. The intervention program design was conducted in three steps facilitated by a coordinating team: (a) situational analysis based on the SMART2D Self-Management Framework and definition of intervention objectives and core strategies; (b) designing generic tools for the strategies; and (c) contextual translation of the generic tools and their delivery. This article focuses on community strategies to strengthen support from the social and physical environment and to link health care and community support. Situational analyses showed that objectives and key functions addressing mediators from the SMART2D framework could be shared. Generic tools ensured retaining of functions, while content and delivery were highly contextualized. Phased, collaborative approach and theoretical framework ensured that key functions were not lost in contextualization, also allowing for cross-comparison despite flexibility with other aspects of the intervention between the sites. The trial registration number of this study is ISRCTN11913581.

Scale-up integrated care for diabetes and hypertension in Cambodia, Slovenia and Belgium (SCUBY): a study design for a quasi-experimental multiple case study

Health systems worldwide struggle to manage the growing burden of type 2 diabetes and hypertension. Many patients receive suboptimal care, especially those most vulnerable. An evidence-based Integrated Care Package (ICP) with primary care-based diagnosis, treatment, education and self-management support and collaboration, leads to better health outcomes, but there is little knowledge of how to scale-up. The Scale-up integrated care for diabetes and hypertension project (SCUBY) aims to address this problem by roadmaps for scaling-up ICP in different types of health systems: a developing health system in a lower middle-income country (Cambodia); a centrally steered health system in a high-income country (Slovenia); and a publicly funded highly privatised health-care health system in a high-income country (Belgium). In a quasi-experimental multi-case design, country-specific scale-up strategies are developed, implemented and evaluated. A three-dimensional framework assesses scale-up along three axes: (1) increase in population coverage; (2) expansion of the ICP package; and (3) integration into the health system. The study includes a formative, intervention and evaluation phase. The intervention entails the development and implementation of an improved scale-up strategy through a roadmap with a minimum dataset to monitor proximal and distal outcomes. The SCUBY project is expected to result in three different roadmaps, tailored to the specific health system and country context, to progress scale-up of the ICP along three dimensions. These roadmaps can be adapted to other health systems with similar typology. Implementation is expected to increase the number of well-controlled patients with type 2 diabetes and hypertension in Cambodia, to reduce inequities in care and increase patient empowerment in Belgium and Slovenia.

Snapshots of Urban and Rural Food Environments: EPOCH-Based Mapping in a High-, Middle-, and Low-Income Country from a Non-Communicable Disease Perspective

A changing food environment is implicated as a primary contributor to the increasing levels of non-communicable diseases (NCDs). This study aimed to generate snapshots of selected external food environments to inform intervention strategies for NCD prevention in three countries: Uganda (low income), South Africa (middle income) and Sweden (high income), with one matched pair of urban-rural sites per country. Fifty formal and informal food retail outlets were assessed, and descriptive and comparative statistical analyses were performed. We found that formal food retail outlets in these countries had both positive and negative traits, as they were the main source of basic food items but also made unhealthy food items readily available. The Ugandan setting had predominantly informal outlets, while the Swedish setting had primarily formal outlets and South Africa had both, which fits broadly into the traditional (Uganda), mixed (South Africa) and modern (Sweden) conceptualized food systems. The promotion of unhealthy food products was high in all settings. Uganda had the highest in-community advertising, followed by South Africa and Sweden with the lowest, perhaps related to differences in regulation and implementation. The findings speak to the need to address contextual differences in NCD-related health interventions by incorporating strategies that address the food environment, and for a critical look at regulations that tackle key environment-related factors of food on a larger scale.

Diabetes self-management in three different income settings: Cross-learning of barriers and opportunities

The burden of type 2 diabetes is increasing rapidly, not least in Sub-Saharan Africa, and disadvantaged populations are disproportionally affected. Self-management is a key strategy for people at risk of or with type 2 diabetes, but implementation is a challenge. The objective of this study is to assess the determinants of self-management from an implementation perspective in three settings: two rural districts in Uganda, an urban township in South Africa, and socio-economically disadvantaged suburbs in Sweden. Data collection followed an exploratory multiple-case study design, integrating data from interviews, focus group discussions, and observations. Data collection and analysis were guided by a contextualized version of a transdisciplinary framework for self-management. Findings indicate that people at risk of or with type 2 diabetes are aware of major self-management strategies, but fail to integrate these into their daily lives. Depending on the setting, opportunities to facilitate implementation of self-management include: improving patient-provider interaction, improving health service delivery, and encouraging community initiatives supporting self-management. Modification of the physical environment (e.g. accessibility to healthy food) and the socio-cultural environment (i.e. norms, values, attitudes, and social support) may have an important influence on people's lifestyle. Regarding the study methodology, we learned that this innovative approach can lead to a comprehensive analysis of self-management determinants across different settings. An important barrier was the difficult contextualization of concepts like perceived autonomy and self-efficacy. Intervention studies are needed to confirm whether the pathways suggested by this study are valid and to test the proposed opportunities for change.