Implementation, Outputs, and Cost of a National Operational Research Training in Rwanda

A 'training of trainers' programme for operational research: increasing capacity remotely

BACKGROUND

Operational research (OR) is a process to improve health system capacity by evaluating interventions to improve health delivery and outcomes. The World Health Organization (WHO) Structured Operational Research Training Initiative (SORT-IT) programme promotes how OR contributes to improved health care delivery and health outcomes. A partnership project between the International Institute of Primary Health Care (IPHCE) in Ethiopia and The University of Queensland (UQ) in Australia modified the SORT-IT programme to deliver a hybrid Training of Trainers programme and improve OR capacity.

OBJECTIVE

This study was performed to develop and evaluate the effectiveness of Train-the Trainers approach in building capability to expand the capacity of the IPHCE to deliver the SORT-IT programme.

METHODS

Recruitment of participants and training were aligned with the principles of the SORT-IT programme. Training was face-to-face for the first session with subsequent training sessions delivered via Zoom over a 13-week period. Participants were required to complete all activities in line with SORT-IT deliverables. Slide decks supporting the SORT-IT training videos were developed and adapted to the Ethiopian context.

RESULTS

Participants had diverse experience from programme directors to research officers. All training sessions were recorded and available for participants to watch and review when required. All participants completed OR protocols to the draft stage. Course evaluation revealed participants found the content and format of the training useful, pertinent, and interesting.

CONCLUSION

A hybrid model (face-to-face and video platform) for OR training was implemented. Managing contextual challenges such as information technology were managed easily by programme staff. Translating course requirements at a management level proved challenging with data collection for the protocols but provided insight into potential future challenges. This OR Training of Trainers course demonstrated that sharing of skills and knowledge can occur through a hybrid delivery model and contribute to developing capacity.

Designing an operational research TB training program in Zambia

BACKGROUND

The USAID-funded Eradicate TB Project (ETB) partnered with the National Tuberculosis and Leprosy Control Program (NTLP) to establish an operational research (OR) training program in order to generate local evidence to enhance TB care in Zambia.

METHOD

Between 2017 and 2021, healthcare workers (HCWs) from district teams underwent two 10-day intensive training sessions. The program evolved to include a competitive application process and an additional primer workshop on developing feasible research questions.

RESULTS

Of the 36 enrollees in the OR training program, 26 (72.2%) completed it, leading to nine OR studies that informed interventions for TB care improvement. Notable achievements include reduced TB mortality, increased pediatric notifications, and enhanced sputum courier systems, with all studies disseminated at national and international conferences, four submitted to peer-reviewed journals, of which three were published. Two studies were replicated by the NTLP at provincial and national levels.

CONCLUSIONS

Integrating OR training into TB initiatives is feasible and beneficial. The program's phased execution and adaptive strategies provide valuable insights for similar settings, although challenges in sustainability of mentorship and funding persist. This success underscores the importance of continuous OR capacity strengthening among HCWs in Zambia.

Health research mentorship in low-income and middle-income countries: a global qualitative evidence synthesis of data from a crowdsourcing open call and scoping review

INTRODUCTION

Research mentorship is critical for advancing science, but there are few practical strategies for cultivating mentorship in health research resource-limited settings. WHO/TDR Global commissioned a group to develop a practical guide on research mentorship. This global qualitative evidence synthesis included data from a crowdsourcing open call and scoping review to identify and propose strategies to enhance research mentorship in low/middle-income country (LMIC) institutions.

METHODS

The crowdsourcing open call used methods recommended by WHO/TDR and solicited descriptions of strategies to enhance research mentorship in LMICs. The scoping review used the Cochrane Handbook and predefined the approach in a protocol. We extracted studies focused on enhancing health research mentorship in LMICs. Textual data describing research mentorship strategies from the open call and studies from the scoping review were coded into themes. The quality of evidence supporting themes was assessed using the Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative research approach.

RESULTS

The open call solicited 46 practical strategies and the scoping review identified 77 studies. We identified the following strategies to enhance research mentorship: recognising mentorship as an institutional responsibility that should be provided and expected from all team members (8 strategies, 15 studies; moderate confidence); leveraging existing research and training resources to enhance research mentorship (15 strategies, 49 studies; moderate confidence); digital tools to match mentors and mentees and sustain mentorship relations over time (14 strategies, 11 studies; low confidence); nurturing a culture of generosity so that people who receive mentorship then become mentors to others (7 strategies, 7 studies; low confidence); peer mentorship defined as informal and formal support from one researcher to another who is at a similar career stage (16 strategies, 12 studies; low confidence).

INTERPRETATION

Research mentorship is a collective institutional responsibility, and it can be strengthened in resource-limited institutions by leveraging already existing resources. The evidence from the crowdsourcing open call and scoping review informed a WHO/TDR practical guide. There is a need for more formal research mentorship programmes in LMIC institutions.

Assessment of Institutional Implementation Research Capacity of the National Institutes of Health D43 Network

Implementation science enhances the efficient practice of solutions from research to real-world application. Low- and lower- to middle-income countries may benefit significantly from implementation research given their limited resources. The National Institutes of Health Fogarty International Center D43 network consists of partnerships between foreign and U.S.-based institutions and aims to strengthen global health research. This paper assesses the D43 network's implementation research focus and training capacity. A survey was distributed to 387 program directors of ongoing and completed D43 projects. Preliminary results show 51.7% of respondents describe "increasing implementation research capacity" as a "high priority." Only 24.8% of faculty in implementation science received formal training, and 60.3% of D43 programs lacked an implementation research training program. Results show there is an increasing need for implementation research but that more can be done to develop implementation research capacity and training. The low response rate of 18% is a limitation of this study.

Health research mentorship in low- and middle-income countries: a scoping review

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this scoping review was to explore and synthesize the available literature on health research mentorship in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs).

INTRODUCTION

Research mentorship is broadly considered a useful strategy to improve research capacities and research outputs. Existing literature and guidance on research mentorship have focused on high-income countries and assumed resource-rich environments. Despite the successful endeavors to improve health research capacity in LMICs, the strategies that work best under different circumstances are poorly understood. There is a need to map and understand the evidence on health research mentorship in the context of LMICs.

INCLUSION CRITERIA

Sources that reported existing practices, barriers, and mitigation strategies related to health research mentorship in LMICs were included.

METHODS

We searched for published and unpublished studies and reports written in English, Spanish, or Portuguese. The search strategy was not limited by search dates and the last search was conducted on January 28, 2022. The databases searched included MEDLINE (PubMed), Embase, Web of Science Core Collection, CINAHL (EBSCOhost), Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and JBI Evidence Synthesis . We also searched for gray literature in a selection of websites and digital repositories. The JBI scoping review methodology was used.

RESULTS

A total of 77 studies and reports were included in the review. The majority of the papers were from Africa (n=28). Others were from the Americas (n=7), South East Asia (n=4), East Mediterranean (n=2), and Western Pacific (n=2). The remaining studies were from LMICs that included at least 2 regional offices. Most of the mentorship projects (n=55) were initiated and funded by institutions from high-income countries. The first authors of 41 papers were primarily affiliated with LMICs. The findings were categorized under a description of research mentorship practices, barriers related to research mentorship, and suggested mitigation strategies. Deliverable-driven training using intensive hands-on mentorship and ongoing peer mentorship programs were some of the non-regular, non-institutionalized approaches used to improve research capacity for junior researchers in LMICs. None of the included papers focused on institutional components of research mentorship in LMICs. The barriers to research mentorship activities in LMICs included lack of clarity on mentorship, cultural variations, unbalanced power dynamics, socio-political influences, language barriers, lack of experienced mentors, and limited local funding. Institutionalizing research mentorship, adapting mentoring methodologies relying on local resources, and addressing and respecting diversity in mentorship programs were among the main strategies identified to effectively implement research mentorship in LMICs.

CONCLUSIONS

Research mentorship initiatives and practices are limited in LMICs. Few available practices have been introduced by researchers and research institutions from high-income countries and those that have are not yet institutionalized. The identified existing practices, barriers, and facilitators on health research mentorship could help the design, implementation, and evaluation of programs to institutionalize health research mentorship in LMICs.

REVIEW REGISTRATION

Open Science Framework osf.io/jqa9z/.

SUPPLEMENTAL DIGITAL CONTENT

A Spanish-language version of the abstract of this review is available as supplemental digital content: http://links.lww.com/SRX/A32.

Capacity building in operational research on obstetric fistula: Experience in the Democratic Republic of Congo, 2017-2021

OBJECTIVE

To implement a Flexible Operational Research Training (FORT) course within the Fistula Care Plus Project, Democratic Republic of Congo, from 2017 to 2021.

METHODS

A descriptive study using design and implementation (process and outcome) data. Two to four members of medical teams from three supported sites were selected for the training based on their research interests and level of involvement in the program.

RESULTS

Two courses (13-14 months each) involving nine facilitators and 17 participants overall were conducted between 2017 and 2021. Most participants in both courses were medical doctors (67% and 71%, respectively) from the supported hospitals (83% and 77%, respectively). About half were women. In addition to classic face-to-face didactic modules, the courses integrated online platforms to cope with the changing contexts (Ebola virus and COVID-19). Most participants reported having gained new skills in developing research protocols, collecting, managing, and analyzing data, and developing research manuscripts. The two courses resulted in six scientific manuscripts and three presentations at international conferences. Participants subsequently published five papers from their research after the first course. The total direct costs for both courses were representing a cost of $3669 per participant trained.

CONCLUSION

The FORT model proved feasible, efficient, and successful. However, scaling up will require more adaptation efforts from programs and participating sites.

Coaching for impact: successful implementation of a multi-national, multi-institutional synchronous research course in Ethiopia

Purpose

Under the American College of Surgeons' Operation Giving Back, several US institutions collaborated with a teaching and regional referral hospital in Ethiopia to develop a surgical research curriculum.

Methods

A virtual, interactive, introductory research course which utilized a web-based classroom platform and live educational sessions via an online teleconferencing application was implemented. Surgical and public health faculty from the US and Ethiopia taught webinars and led breakout coaching sessions to facilitate participants' project development. Both a pre-course needs assessment survey and a post-course participation survey were used to examine the impact of the course.

Results

Twenty participants were invited to participate in the course. Despite the majority of participants having connection issues (88%), 11 participants completed the course with an 83% average attendance rate. Ten participants successfully developed structured research proposals based on their local clinical needs.

Conclusion

This novel multi-institutional and multi-national research course design was successfully implemented and could serve as a template for greater development of research capacity building in the low- and middle-income country (LMIC) setting.

What is operational research and how can national tuberculosis programmes in low- and middle-income countries use it to end TB?

Despite considerable progress over the years, tuberculosis (TB) still remains the top cause of death among the infectious diseases and has devastating socio-economic consequences for people in low- and middle-income countries. To add to this, the emergence of the COVID-19 pandemic has worsened delivery of TB care across the globe. As a global community, we have committed to end the TB epidemic by 2030. The World Health Organization has framed a strategy to achieve this goal which consists of three pillars namely i) integrated patient-centred care and prevention, ii) bold policies and systems and iii) intensified research and innovation. An analysis of the performance of national tuberculosis programmes (NTPs) across the globe against the ten priority indicators recommended for monitoring the end TB strategy show that there are huge gaps at every step in the cascade of care of TB patients. In our view, these gaps reflect suboptimal implementation of existing strategies known to be efficacious and operational research (OR) is one of the best available tools to plug the gaps. In this paper, we define what operational research is and how it differs from other kinds of research. We also share our views and experiences about how operational research can be used by NTPs to identify implementation gaps and their reasons, and develop and test possible solutions - which are then integrated to make changes to policy and practice and eventually improve programme outcomes. OR can be defined as research into interventions, strategies and tools which produces practical useable knowledge that can be used to enhance the quality, coverage, effectiveness and efficiency of disease control programmes, health services or health systems in which the research is conducted. The key steps in integrating operational research in the NTPs include: i) securing political commitment reflected by inclusion of OR in the national strategic plans of NTPs and earmarked funding, ii) having a critical mass of dedicated and trained human resources in OR within the NTP, iii) setting research priorities and steering the direction of research in the country, iv) using output-oriented models of capacity building such as the Structured Operational Research Training Initiative (SORT IT) model and building communities of practice, v) harnessing existing capacity in the country by forging partnerships with academia, vi) NTP-led nationwide, multicentre OR studies, vii) providing access to anonymized patient and programme surveillance data, vii) creating a forum for evidence dissemination and fostering policy change and ix) monitoring and accountability. In conclusion, ending the TB epidemic will not be possible without new tools (diagnostics, drugs, vaccines) and a multi-sectoral response involving stakeholders beyond the health ministry, including private providers, patients and communities. However, timely conduct of operational research to fine-tune programme implementation and ensuring proper deployment of new tools will be equally crucial to maximize the effectiveness and efficiency of interventions and ultimately contribute towards ending TB.