FreshRSS

🔒
❌ Acerca de FreshRSS
Hay nuevos artículos disponibles. Pincha para refrescar la página.
AnteayerTus fuentes RSS

Enablers and barriers for scaling up non-communicable disease interventions across diverse global health contexts: a qualitative study using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research

Por: Pardoel · Z. · Folkertsma · I. · Ramani-Chander · A. · Thrift · A. G. · Joshi · R. · Bandurek · I. · van Olmen · J. · Shrestha · A. · Rawal · L. B. · Wouters · E. · Maharani · A. · Delobelle · P. · Liu · H. · Theilmann · M. · Webster · J. · Sujarwoto · S. · Siddiqi · K. · Probandari · A.
Objectives

To identify enablers and barriers for scaling up non-communicable disease (NCD) interventions across diverse global contexts and to map these factors to the WHO’s health system building blocks.

Design

A multi-method qualitative study applying the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research to analyse data from multiple projects nearing or completing scale-up.

Setting

Global Alliance for Chronic Diseases-funded implementation research projects conducted across 18 low- and middle-income countries and high-income settings.

Participants

Data was derived from documents (n=77) including peer-reviewed publications, policy briefs, and reports and interviews with stakeholders (n=18) (eg, principal investigators, medical professionals, public health workers).

Interventions

Various context-specific interventions targeting sustainable scale-up of NCD (eg, diabetes, hypertension, cardiovascular disease) interventions at the community, primary care or policy levels.

Primary and secondary outcome measures

The primary outcome was identifying contextual enablers and barriers to intervention scale-up. Secondary outcomes included exploring how these factors aligned with health system building blocks (eg, leadership/governance, healthcare workforce).

Results

Twenty enablers (eg, intervention adaptability, strong stakeholder engagement, local empowerment) and 25 barriers (eg, resource limitations, intervention complexity, stakeholder burnout) were identified. Contextual alignment, supportive governance and capacity building were critical for sustainability, while cultural misalignment and socio-political instability frequently hampered scaling efforts.

Conclusions

Tailoring interventions to local health systems, ensuring stakeholder co-ownership and incorporating strategies to mitigate stakeholder burn-out are essential to achieving sustainable, scalable NCD solutions. Future research should focus on integrating systematic cultural adaptation, sustainable financing and workforce capacity building into scale-up planning.

How can cities accelerate, support and evaluate actions for active movement for health: protocol for CITY-MOVE, a multicase implementation research study in six cities in three continents

Por: van Olmen · J. · Thornton · L. · Ndejjo · R. · Lowry · R. · Wouters · E. · Correa Senior · J. C. · Negrin Marques · T. H. · Walker · J. · Oldenhof · L. · Bastiaens · H. · Klemenc Ketis · Z. · De Witte · C. · Exel · J. v. · on behalf of CITY-MOVE Consortium · Garzon · Manyahuillca
Introduction

Non-communicable diseases (NCDs) are a leading cause of global mortality, disproportionately affecting low and middle-income countries (LMICs). Physical inactivity, a key contributor to NCDs, is prevalent worldwide despite evidence supporting the health benefits of physical activity (PA). Cities, while often associated with barriers to PA, also present unique opportunities to enhance PA through systemic, context-sensitive interventions or so-called actions. However, evidence on effective city-level PA strategies, particularly in LMICs, remains limited. The CITY based interventions to stimulate active MOVEment for health (CITY-MOVE) project aims to accelerate, support and evaluate the implementation of PA actions at the city level by adapting the WHO Global Action Plan on Physical Activity into locally relevant strategies across six cities worldwide, accompanied by a cross-contextual evaluation framework to ensure transferability and scalability.

Methods and analysis

This multicase study examines 13 PA actions in six cities (Bogotá, Lima, Kampala, Antwerp, Rotterdam and Ljubljana) across three continents, addressing both early (design and implementation) and late (evaluation) action stages. Early-stage actions employ action research in Living Labs to codesign and implement PA initiatives with local stakeholders, while late-stage interventions focus on retrospective evaluations of implementation outcomes. The framework integrates the Medical Research Council guidance on complex interventions with the Context and Implementation of Complex Interventions. Mixed methods are employed, including document review, interviews, participatory workshops and quantitative analysis of PA and NCD indicators. A cross-contextual Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) framework will synthesise findings to inform scalability and transferability of actions.

Ethics and dissemination

Ethics approvals were obtained from local review boards in the participating cities.

Dissemination will occur at three levels: local, regional and global. Locally, findings will be shared with city authorities, non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and healthcare providers through Living Labs and policy dialogues. At the regional level, knowledge will be spread across cities in Europe, Latin America and East Africa through Communities of Practice and the use of tools like the MCDA framework. Globally, the project will contribute to the scientific community and international organisations such as the WHO and UN-Habitat, by sharing results through open access publications, conferences and global networks to ensure widespread dissemination and sustainability of the project’s impacts.

Registration details

This study and its outcomes are publicly accessible on OSF (https://osf.io/mn8zd/) and ZENODO (https://zenodo.org/communities/citymove/).

Study protocol for a pragmatic randomised controlled trial in Belgian primary care and hospital settings on the effectiveness of an eHealth self-management support programme consisting of pain education and coaching of activity needs in breast cancer surv

Por: De Groef · A. · Dams · L. · Moseley · G. L. · Heathcote · L. C. · Wiles · L. K. · Catley · M. · Vogelzang · A. · Hibbert · P. · Morlion · B. · Van Overbeke · M. · Tack · E. · Van Dijck · S. · Devoogdt · N. · Gursen · C. · De Paepe · A. L. · Mertens · M. · van Olmen · J. · Willem · L. · Tja
Introduction

Persistent pain after finishing breast cancer treatment is a common and disabling problem. The current state-of-the-art pain management advocates, in addition to biomedical (non-)pharmacological approaches, a biopsychosocial rehabilitation approach to address persistent pain, combining pain science education with promoting an active lifestyle through self-regulation techniques. We propose testing an innovative eHealth self-management support programme for this purpose in the breast cancer population with persistent pain after finishing cancer treatment. This delivery mode is believed to reduce barriers to pain self-management by providing timely, safe and cost-effective assistance addressing the biopsychosocial needs of patients. Utilising a chatbot format, the eHealth programme delivers pain science education and promotes physical activity (PA), personalised through decision-tree-based algorithms to support pain self-management. The programme aims to empower patients with understanding, coping skills and self-management techniques to reduce pain-related disability and enhance participation in daily life. The primary objective is to determine programme effectiveness compared with (1) usual care (superiority) and (2) a similar face-to-face pain self-management support programme (non-inferiority).

Methods and analysis

A pragmatic, three-arm randomised controlled trial was started in April 2024 at the University Hospitals of Antwerp and Leuven and primary care settings in Belgium. Participants are breast cancer survivors with persistent pain after finishing cancer treatment. Two hundred seventy participants will be randomised to one of three trial arms: (1) eHealth self-management support programme, (2) usual care or (3) a face-to-face self-management support programme. The ‘eHealth self-management support programme’ begins with a pain science education (PSE) module to initially convey key pain-related concepts and provide personalised pain management tips. Then, the programme progresses to daily activity planning to promote an active lifestyle. Guided by the Health Action Process Approach (HAPA) model, participants set and review daily activity goals and track progress. The eHealth self-management programme uses a chatbot and is accessible on any digital device. The ‘usual care programme’ involves sending the participants a study-specific brochure by postal mail and does not include any formal PSE and/or PA programmes. They may pursue or continue self-initiated care. In Belgium, usual care primarily involves pharmacological treatment, general advice on PA and the provision of informational brochures. The ‘face-to-face self-management support programme’ mirrors the eHealth intervention, combining PSE with PA coaching. It starts with three individual sessions with a trained physical therapist for biopsychosocial assessment and PSE, followed by six sessions on goal setting and active lifestyle coaching. The educational content is delivered both verbally and in written form. The primary outcome will be pain-related disability 6 months after baseline assessment. As a key secondary outcome, the effect on pain beliefs and attitudes will be investigated after the educational part of the eHealth and face-to-face programme (ie, at 6 weeks after baseline). Other secondary outcomes related to other dimensions of pain and physical-, psychosocial- and health-economic outcomes will be assessed at 12 weeks and 6 and 12 months after baseline as well.

Ethics and dissemination

The study will be conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki (2024). The protocol has been approved by the ethical committee of the University Hospitals of Leuven and Antwerp. Results will be disseminated via peer-reviewed scientific journals and presentations at congresses. Ethical Committee of the University Hospitals Leuven and Antwerp: BUN B3002023000132.

Trial registration number

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT06308029.

❌