Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Health Research Policy and Systems
Published in: Health Research Policy and Systems 1/2018

Open Access 01-12-2018 | Research

Developing a workbook to support the contextualisation of global health systems guidance: a case study identifying steps and critical factors for success in this process at WHO

Authors: Elizabeth Alvarez, John N. Lavis, Melissa Brouwers, Lisa Schwartz

Published in: Health Research Policy and Systems | Issue 1/2018

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Global guidance can help countries strengthen their health systems to deliver effective interventions to their populations. However, to have an impact, guidance needs to be contextualised or adapted to local settings; this process includes consideration of health system arrangements and political system factors. To date, methods to support contextualisation do not exist. In response, a workbook was designed to provide specific methods and strategies to enable the contextualisation of WHO’s ‘Optimizing health worker roles to improve maternal and newborn health’ (OptimizeMNH) guidance at the national or subnational level. The objective of this study was to describe the process of developing the workbook and identify key steps of the development process, barriers that arose and facilitators that helped overcome some of these barriers.

Methods

A qualitative single case study design was carried out. Interviews, documents and a reflexive journal were used. Constant comparison and an edit-style of organisation were used during data analysis to develop concepts, themes, subthemes and relationships among them.

Results

Thirteen interviews were conducted and 52 documents were reviewed. Three main steps were identified in the process of developing the workbook for health systems guidance contextualisation, namely (1) determining the need for and gaining approval to develop the workbook, (2) developing the workbook (taking on the task, creating the structure of the workbook, operationalising its components, undergoing approval processes and editing it), and (3) implementing the workbook both at the WHO level and at the national/subnational level.
Five barriers and/or facilitators emerged relevant to each step, namely (1) having well-placed and credible champions, (2) creating and capitalising on opportunities, (3) finding the right language to engage various actors and obtain buy-in, (4) obtaining and maintaining meaningful buy-in, and (5) ensuring access to resources.

Conclusions

Understanding the key steps and the critical factors involved in the process of developing the workbook could help in the planning of similar and other tools aimed to support the implementation of WHO guidance. A plan for dissemination and implementation needs to be addressed during the preparation of these tools.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
Bosch-Capblanch X, Lavis JN, Lewin S, Atun R, Røttingen J-A, Dröschel D, et al. Guidance for evidence-informed policies about health systems: rationale for and challenges of guidance development. PLoS Med. 2012;9(3):e1001185.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
2.
Travis P, Bennett S, Haines A, Pang T, Bhutta Z, Hyder A, et al. Overcoming health-systems constraints to achieve the Millennium Development Goals. Lancet. 2004;364:900–6.CrossRefPubMed
3.
World Health Organization. Everybody’s Business: Strengthening Health Systems to Improve Health Outcomes: WHO’s Framework for Action. Geneva: WHO; 2007.
4.
5.
Lavis JN, Røttingen J-A, Bosch-Capblanch X, Atun R, El-Jardali F, Gilson L, et al. Guidance for evidence-informed policies about health systems: linking guidance development to policy development. PLoS Med. 2012;9(3):e1001186.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
6.
Kingdon J. Agendas, Alternatives, and Public Policies. 2nd ed. New York: HarperCollins College Publishers; 2003.
7.
Bollini P, Laporte J-D, Harding TW. HIV prevention in prisons. Do international guidelines matter? Eur J Pub Health. 2002;12(2):83–9.CrossRef
8.
Eamer GG, Randall GE. Barriers to implementing WHO’s exclusive breastfeeding policy for women living with HIV in sub-Saharan Africa: an exploration of ideas, interests and institutions. Int J Health Plann Manag. 2013;28(3):257–68.CrossRef
9.
Gomez P, Gutman J, Roman E, Dickerson A, Andre Z, Youll S, et al. Assessment of the consistency of national-level policies and guidelines for malaria in pregnancy in five African countries. Malar J. 2014;13:212.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
10.
Mulligan JA, Mandike R, Palmer N, Williams H, Abdulla S, Bloland P, et al. The costs of changing national policy: lessons from malaria treatment policy guidelines in Tanzania. Tropical Med Int Health. 2006;11(4):452–61.CrossRef
11.
12.
Hoffman S, Lavis J, Bennett S. The use of research evidence in two international organizations’ recommendations about health systems. Healthc Policy. 2009;5(1):66–86.PubMedPubMedCentral
13.
14.
15.
16.
Oxman AD, Lavis JN, Lewin S, Fretheim A. SUPPORT Tools for evidence-informed health Policymaking (STP) 1: What is evidence-informed policymaking? Health Res Policy Syst. 2009;7(Suppl 1):S1.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
17.
Lavis JN, Wilson MG, Oxman AD, Lewin S, Fretheim A. SUPPORT Tools for Evidence-informed Health Policymaking (STP) 4: Using research evidence to clarify a problem. Health Res Policy Syst. 2009;7(Suppl 1):S4.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
18.
Lavis JN, Wilson MG, Oxman AD, Grimshaw J, Lewin S, Fretheim A. SUPPORT Tools for Evidence-informed Health Policymaking (STP) 5: Using research evidence to frame options to address a problem. Health Res Policy Syst. 2009;7(Suppl 1):S5.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
19.
Fretheim A, Munabi-Babigumira S, Oxman AD, Lavis JN, Lewin S. SUPPORT Tools for Evidence-informed Policymaking in Health 6: Using research evidence to address how an option will be implemented. Health Res Policy Syst. 2009;7(Suppl 1):S6.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
20.
Lavis JN, Oxman AD, Souza NM, Lewin S, Gruen RL, Fretheim A. SUPPORT Tools for Evidence-informed Health Policymaking (STP) 9: Assessing the applicability of the findings of a systematic review. Health Res Policy Syst. 2009;7(Suppl 1):S9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
21.
Oxman AD, Lavis JN, Lewin S, Fretheim A. SUPPORT Tools for Evidence-informed Health Policymaking (STP) 10: Taking equity into consideration when assessing the findings of a systematic review. Health Res Policy Syst. 2009;7(Suppl 1):S10.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
22.
Oxman AD, Fretheim A, Lavis JN, Lewin S. SUPPORT Tools for Evidence-informed Health Policymaking (STP) 12: Finding and using research evidence about resource use and costs. Health Res Policy Syst. 2009;7(Suppl 1):S12.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
23.
Lavis JN, Permanand G, Oxman AD, Lewin S, Fretheim A. SUPPORT Tools for Evidence-informed Health Policymaking (STP) 13: Preparing and using policy briefs to support evidence-informed policymaking. Health Res Policy Syst. 2009;7(Suppl 1):S13.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
24.
Lavis JN, Boyko JA, Oxman AD, Lewin S, Fretheim A. SUPPORT Tools for Evidence-informed Health Policymaking (STP) 14: Organising and using policy dialogues to support evidence-informed policymaking. Health Res Policy Syst. 2009;7(Suppl 1):S14.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
25.
Oxman AD, Lewin S, Lavis J, Fretheim A. SUPPORT Tools for Evidence-informed Health Policymaking (STP) 15: Engaging the public in evidence-informed policymaking. Health Res Policy Syst. 2009;7(Suppl 1):S15.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
26.
Oxman AD, Lavis JN, Fretheim A, Lewin S. SUPPORT Tools for Evidence-informed Health Policymaking (STP) 16: Using research evidence in balancing the pros and cons of policies. Health Res Policy Syst. 2009;7(Suppl 1):S16.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
27.
Lewin S, Oxman AD, Lavis JN, Fretheim A, Marti SG, Munabi-Babigumira S. SUPPORT Tools for Evidence-informed Policymaking in Health 11: Finding and using evidence about local conditions. Health Res Policy Syst. 2009;7(Suppl 1):S11.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
28.
Fretheim A, Oxman AD, Lavis JN, Lewin S. SUPPORT Tools for Evidence-informed Policymaking in Health 18: Planning monitoring and evaluation of policies. Health Res Policy Syst. 2009;7(Suppl 1):S18.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
29.
30.
Yin R. Case Study Research: Design and Methods. 4th ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; 2009.
31.
Baxter P, Jack S. Qualitative case study methodology: Study design and implementation for novice researchers. Qual Rep. 2008;13(4):544–59.
32.
Creswell J. Qualitative Inquiry & Research Design: Choosing Among Five Approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; 2007.
33.
Bradley EH, Curry LA, Devers KJ. Qualitative data analysis for health services research: developing taxonomy, themes, and theory. Health Serv Res. 2007;42(4):1758–72.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
34.
Crabtree B, Miller W, editors. Doing Qualitative Research. 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.; 1999.
35.
Alvarez E. Developing and Evaluating the Use of a Workbook for Contextualizing Health Systems Guidance. Hamilton, ON: McMaster University; 2016.
36.
Lachance J, Oxendine J. Redefining leadership education in graduate public health programs: prioritization, focus, and guiding principles. Am J Public Health. 2015;105(S1):S60–4.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
37.
38.
Gagliardi AR, Brouwers MC, Bhattacharyya OK. A framework of the desirable features of guideline implementation tools (GItools): Delphi survey and assessment of GItools. Implement Sci. 2014;9:98.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
39.
Gagliardi AR. “More bang for the buck”: exploring optimal approaches for guideline implementation through interviews with international developers. BMC Health Serv Res. 2012;12:404.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
40.
Kastner M, Estey E, Hayden L, Chatterjee A, Grudniewicz A, Graham ID, et al. The development of a guideline implementability tool (GUIDE-IT): a qualitative study of family physician perspectives. BMC Fam Pract. 2014;15:19.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
41.
Bahtsevani C, Willman A, Khalaf A, Ostman M. Developing an instrument for evaluating implementation of clinical practice guidelines: a test-retest study. J Eval Clin Pract. 2008;14(5):839–46.CrossRefPubMed
42.
Shiffman RN, Dixon J, Brandt C, Essaihi A, Hsiao A, Michel G, et al. The GuideLine Implementability Appraisal (GLIA): Development of an instrument to identify obstacles to guideline implementation. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2005;5:23.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
43.
Gagliardi AR, Brouwers MC, Palda VA, Lemieux-Charles L, Grimshaw JM. How can we improve guideline use? A conceptual framework of implementability. Implement Sci. 2011;6:26.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
44.
Harrison MB, Graham ID, van den Hoek J, Dogherty EJ, Carley ME, Angus V. Guideline adaptation and implementation planning: a prospective observational study. Implement Sci. 2013;8:49.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
45.
46.
Schunemann HJ, Wiercioch W, Brozek J, Etxeandia-Lkobaltzeta I, Mustafa RA, Manja V, et al. GRADE Evidence to Decision (EtD) frameworks for adoption, adaptation, and de novo development of trustworthy recommendations: GRADE-ADOLOPMENT. J Clin Epidemiol. 2017;81:101–10.CrossRefPubMed
47.
48.
Gagliardi A, Webster F, Brouwers M, Baxter N, Finelli A, Gallinger S. How does context influence collaborative decision-making for health services planning, delivery and evaluation? BMC Health Serv Res. 2014;14:545.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
49.
Greenhalgh T, Robert G, Macfarlane F, Bate P, Kyriakidou O. Diffusion of innovations in service organizations: systematic review and recommendations. Milbank Q. 2004;82(4):581–629.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
50.
Tong A, Sainsbury P, Craig J. Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ): A 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups. Int J Qual Health Care. 2007;19(6):349–57.CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Developing a workbook to support the contextualisation of global health systems guidance: a case study identifying steps and critical factors for success in this process at WHO
Authors
Elizabeth Alvarez
John N. Lavis
Melissa Brouwers
Lisa Schwartz
Publication date
01-12-2018
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
Health Research Policy and Systems / Issue 1/2018
Electronic ISSN: 1478-4505
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12961-018-0297-x

Other articles of this Issue 1/2018

Health Research Policy and Systems 1/2018 Go to the issue

Research

Priority-setting in health research in Iran: a qualitative study on barriers and facilitators

Commentary

The evolution of the field of Health Policy and Systems Research and outstanding challenges

Research

The value of a causal loop diagram in exploring the complex interplay of factors that influence health promotion in a multisectoral health system in Australia

Research

An evaluation of South Africa’s public–private partnership for the localisation of vaccine research, manufacture and distribution

Research

National stakeholders’ perceptions of the processes that inform the development of national clinical practice guidelines for primary healthcare in South Africa

Opinion

The discordance between evidence and health policy in the United States: the science of translational research and the critical role of diverse stakeholders