Using health impact assessment (HIA) to understand the wider health and well-being implications of policy decisions: the COVID-19 'staying at home and social distancing policy' in Wales

Qualitative comparative analysis of policies implemented by 26 European countries during the 2020 great lockdown

Introduction

During the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in Europe, from March 1 to April 15, 2020, significant variations emerged among countries regarding the implementation of lockdown policies. During this period, viewed strictly from an epidemiological perspective, lockdown measures are considered the most effective means of containing a pandemic. However, the adoption of such measures varied, raising questions about whether the reluctance or failure of countries to implement lockdown policies reflected a disregard for epidemiological knowledge or stemmed from an inability to enforce these measures.

Methods

This article employs Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) with 26 European countries as case studies to investigate under what combination of conditions a country would implement lockdown policies.

Results

The QCA results identify three distinct combinations of conditions that lead countries to implement lockdown measures. First, countries with relatively concentrated political power are more likely to implement lockdown policies. Among the 10 countries governed by a majority party or majority coalition within a two-party or moderate multi-party system, seven implemented lockdown policies. Second, in cases of relatively dispersed political power, countries facing state fragility risks are more likely to implement lockdown policies. Among the eight countries that meet both conditions, five implemented lockdown policies. Finally, factors such as political heritage, severity of the pandemic, demographic composition, healthcare access, quality standards, and the ruling party's ideology play a lesser role in the decision to enact lockdown measures.

Discussion

This article offers a novel perspective on the dynamics of party politics and state capacity in the context of decision-making during the COVID-19 pandemic. It contributes to a deeper understanding of the intricate relationship between political systems and public health crisis management, highlighting how various political and governance factors influence the adoption of public health interventions during crises.

Health Equity Impact Assessment (HEIA) reporting tool: developing a checklist for policymakers

INTRODUCTION

Health Equity Impact Assessment (HEIA) is a decision support tool that shows users how a new program, policy, or innovation affects health equity in different population groups. Various HEIA reporting and dissemination tools are available, nevertheless, a practical standard tool to present the results of HEIA in an appropriate period to policymakers is lacking. This work reports the development of a tool (a checklist) for HEIA reporting at the decision-making level, aiming to promote the application of HEIA evidence for improving health equity.

METHODS

This is a mixed-method study that was carried out over four stages in 2022-2023: 1) identifying HEIA models, checklists, and reporting instruments; 2) development of the initial HEIA reporting checklist; 3) checklist validation; and 4) piloting the checklist. We also analyzed the Face, CVR, and CVI validity of the tool.

RESULTS

We developed the initial checklist through analysis of 53 included studies and the opinions of experts. The final checklist comprised five sections: policy introduction (eight subsections), managing the HEIA of policy (seven subsections), scope of the affected population (three subsections), HEIA results (seven subsections), and recommendations (three subsections).

CONCLUSION

Needs assessment, monitoring during implementation, health impact assessment, and other tools such as monitoring outcome reports, appraisals, and checklists are all methods for assessing health equity impact. Other equity-focused indicators, such as the equity lens and equity appraisal, may have slightly different goals than the HEIA. Similarly, the formats for presenting and publishing HEIA reports might vary, depending on the target population and the importance of the report.

Household food security access and dietary diversity amidst COVID-19 pandemic in rural Nepal; an evidence from rapid assessment

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic led to surging concerns about food insecurity status throughout the world. In response to global and national concerns on food and nutrition security, this study aimed to examine the prevalence and determining factors of household food insecurity and dietary diversity among people from selected rural municipalities of Lalitpur district, Nepal.

METHODS

A community-based cross-sectional study was conducted among 432 households. Pretested structured questionnaires were used to collect socio-demographic characteristics of the participants, household income; influence of COVID-19 on their income and livelihood, household's access to food and dietary diversity. Food insecurity was measured using the Household Food Insecurity Access Scale (HFIAS) and the Household Dietary Diversity Score (HDDS). A multivariable analysis was done using binary logistic regression model following a bivariate analysis to assess the association between the dependent and independent variables.

RESULTS

More than one-third (36%) of the households reported some form of food insecurity. The overall mean score for Household Dietary Diversity Score (HDDS) was 6.0 (±1.1). Multivariable logistic regression analysis showed that participants aged 41-64 years (aOR = 0.35, 95% CI: 0.21-0.59), those over 64 years (aOR = 0.22, 95% CI: 0.07-0.66), as well as those in service occupation (aOR = 0.22, 95% CI: 0.06-0.77) were associated with lower odds of HFIAS. Conversely, Participants belonging to a disadvantaged ethnic group (aOR = 2.73, 95% CI: 1.23-6.07), having no education (aOR = 3.70, 95% CI: 1.16-11.71) or primary education (aOR = 3.67, 95% CI: 1.23-9.89), and those suffering from chronic illness (aOR = 3.12, 95% CI: 1.53-6.35) were associated with higher odds of HFIAS. As for HDDS, participants aged 41-64 years (aOR = 0.48, 95% CI: 0.28-0.83) were associated with lower odds of HDDS, while participants having no education (aOR = 10.05, 95% CI: 4.05-24.01) were associated with significantly higher odds of HDDS.

CONCLUSION

Owing to the pandemic, our study showed a substantial prevalence of food insecurity among diverse community residing in rural outskirts of Kathmandu Valley, particularly among disadvantaged ethnic group and people with lower level of education. Interventions targeting these particular groups may help in improving HFIAS and HDDS among them during emergencies.

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.

Seeking Good Work in the COVID-19 Recovery: Shifting Priorities and Employment Choices Among Workers

OBJECTIVE

Disruption to working lives spurred by the COVID-19 pandemic may shape people's preferences for future employment. We aimed to identify the components of work prioritized by a UK sample and the employment changes they had considered since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

A nationally representative longitudinal household survey was conducted in Wales at two time points between 2020 and 2021.

RESULTS

Those in poorer health prioritized flexibility and were more likely to consider retiring. Those with limiting preexisting conditions or low mental well-being were more likely to consider becoming self-employed. Those experiencing financial insecurity (including those with high wage precarity or those furloughed) were more likely to consider retraining, becoming self-employed, or securing permanent employment.

CONCLUSIONS

Ensuring flexible, secure, and autonomous work is accessible for individuals facing greater employment-related insecurity may be key.

Predicted and observed impacts of COVID-19 lockdowns: two Health Impact Assessments in Scotland and Wales

Health Impact Assessment is a key approach used internationally to identify positive or negative impacts of policies, plans and proposals on health and well-being. In 2020, HIAs were undertaken in Scotland and Wales to identify the potential health and well-being impacts of the 'stay at home' and physical distancing measures implemented at the start of the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic. There is sparse evidence evaluating whether the impacts predicted in HIAs occur following policy implementation. This paper evaluates the impacts anticipated in the COVID-19 HIAs against actual observed trends. The processes undertaken were compared and predicted impacts were tabulated by population groups and main determinants of health. Routine data and literature evidence were collated to compare predicted and observed impacts. Nearly all health impacts anticipated in both HIAs have occurred in the direction predicted. There have been significant adverse impacts through multiple direct and indirect pathways including loss of income, social isolation, disruption to education and services, and psychosocial effects. This research demonstrates the value of prediction in impact assessment and fills a gap in the literature by comparing the predicted impacts identified within the HIAs with observed trends. Post-COVID-19 recovery should centre health and well-being within future policies and decisions. Processes like HIA can support this as part of a 'health in all policies' approach to improve the health and well-being of populations.

Facilitators, Barriers and Views on the Role of Public Health Institutes in Promoting and Using Health Impact Assessment-An International Virtual Scoping Survey and Expert Interviews

Public health institutes have an important role in promoting and protecting the health and well-being of populations. A key focus of such institutes are the wider determinants of health, embracing the need to advocate for 'Health in All Policies' (HiAP). A valuable tool to support this is the health impact assessment. This study aims to support public health institutes to advocate more successfully for the use of health impact assessments and HiAP in order to promote and protect health, well-being and equity. During July 2021, a quantitative online survey was undertaken across international networks with 17 valid responses received. Semi-structured interviews were also administered with nine expert representatives and analysed thematically. In total, 64.7% (n = 11) of survey respondents were aware of health impact assessments and 47.1% (n = 8) currently conducted health impact assessments. It was noted that there are differing approaches to HIAs, with a need for a clear set of standards. Barriers to use included lack of knowledge, training and resources. Overall, 64.7% (n = 11) of survey respondents would like to do more to develop knowledge and capacity around health impact assessments. The results from this study can serve as a platform to help build knowledge, networks and expertise, to help support a 'Health in All Policies' approach and address inequalities which exist in all societies.

Improving Harm Reduction Services: A Qualitative Study on the Perspectives of Highly Marginalized Persons Who Inject Drugs in Montreal

Harm reduction (HR) is an alternative to the moralization of drug use and a pragmatic public health approach aimed at minimizing harms associated with use. This study sought to gain the perspectives of persons who inject drugs (PWID) on the adequacy of services provided by HR organizations in Montreal. Twenty-two semi-structured interviews and two focus groups were conducted with 30 participants. Some of the key advantages of HR perceived by participants include access to injection equipment, psychosocial support, and reduced social isolation. However, many wanted more opportunities for social insertion and greater value to be placed on their knowledge and life experiences (e.g., experiential knowledge of the street scene, drug use, sex work, or homelessness). This study suggests that PWID who access HR services in Montreal are interested in paid work opportunities in environments that promote power sharing, and activities that are conducted and managed by and for them.

Health and health inequalities impact assessment for non-clinical measures to control COVID-19 in the Basque Country and Navarre (Spain)

This article describes the results of a health and health inequalities impact assessment of the COVID-19 pandemic control measures in the regions of the Basque Country and Navarre in Spain. A literature review was conducted on Pubmed and Web of Science (WoS) databases, in addition to individual semi-structured interviews and focus groups with experts, key informants and different profiles of citizens. A wide variety of social determinants of health have been affected by the measures, which included individual health-related behaviors, service disruption in formal care, educational settings, and health care provision. These changes have particularly affected certain population groups including children and adolescents, older people, those with health conditions and disabilities together with caregivers, women, as well as people with low levels of education, income, and resources. In future scenarios it will be necessary to pay attention to the potential impacts of policy responses on health inequalities to avoid an increase in existing health gaps.

Strategic Assessment of Neighbourhood Environmental Impacts on Mental Health in the Lisbon Region (Portugal): A Strategic Focus and Assessment Framework at the Local Level

Scientific evidence shows that each place/environment generates specific conditions with associated impacts on the mental health and well-being of the population. A holistic, multilevel and integrated environmental approach to mental health enhances the understanding of this phenomena, supporting the local decision-making processes to improve spatial planning of neighbourhood environments. The aim of this study is to develop a strategic assessment framework, based on four municipalities in the Lisbon Region (Portugal), that explores policy and planning initiatives capable of generating favourable neighbourhood environmental conditions for mental health while also detecting risks. Using baseline results of significant statistical associations between individuals’ perceptions of their neighbourhood environment and their mental health in the Lisbon Region, a Strategic Focus on Environmental and Mental Health Assessment framework (SEmHA) was built, by applying the methodology “Strategic Thinking for Sustainability” in Strategic Environmental Assessment, developed by Partidário in 2012. Taking into account the promotion of the population’s mental health, four critical decision factors of neighbourhood environments were identified: (1) public space quality (e.g., improving sense of place), (2) physical environment quality (e.g., low levels of noise exposure), (3) professional qualification and creation of economic activities (e.g., attracting new economic activities), and (4) services and facilities (e.g., improving access to health and education services). The proposed strategic focus and assessment framework contributes to ensuring that interventions in neighbourhood environments truly achieve community mental health benefits and reduce inequalities, thus helping policy makers to assess impacts at the local level.

'Health in All Policies'-A Key Driver for Health and Well-Being in a Post-COVID-19 Pandemic World

Policy in all sectors affects health, through multiple pathways and determinants. Health in all policies (HiAP) is an approach that seeks to identify and influence the health and equity impacts of policy decisions, to enhance health benefits and avoid harm. This usually involves the use of health impact assessment or health lens analysis. There is growing international experience in these approaches, and some countries have cross-sectoral governance structures that prioritize the assessment of the policies that are most likely to affect health. The fundamental elements of HiAP are inter-sectoral collaboration, policy influence, and holistic consideration of the range of health determinants affected by a policy area or proposal. HiAP requires public health professionals to invest time to build partnerships and engage meaningfully with the sectors affecting the social determinants of health and health equity. With commitment, political will and tools such as the health impact assessment, it provides a powerful approach to integrated policymaking that promotes health, well-being, and equity. The COVID-19 pandemic has raised the profile of public health and highlighted the links between health and other policy areas. This paper describes the rationale for, and principles underpinning, HiAP mechanisms, including HIA, experiences, challenges and opportunities for the future.