Background The COVID-19 pandemic affects the processes of routine care for chronic patients. A better understanding helps to increase resilience of the health system and prepare adequately for next waves of the pandemic. Methods A qualitative study was conducted in 16 primary care practices: 6 solo working, 4 monodisciplinary and 7 multidisciplinary. Twenty-one people (doctors, nurses, dieticians) were interviewed, using semi-structured video interviews. A thematic analysis was done using the domains of the Chronic Care Model (CCM). Results Three themes emerged: changes in health care organization, risk stratification and self-management support. All participating practices reported drastic changes in organization with a collective shift towards COVID-19 care, and reduction of chronic care activities, less consultations, and staff responsible for self-management support put on hold. A transition to digital support did not occur. Few practitioners had a systematic approach to identify and contact high-risk patients for early follow-up. A practice with a pre-established structured team collaboration managed to continue most chronic care elements. Generally, practitioners expected no effects of the temporary disruption for patients, although they expressed concern about patients already poorly regulated. Conclusion Our findings show a disruption of the delivery of chronic care in the Belgium prim care context. In such contexts, the establishment of the CCM can facilitate continuity of care in crisis times. Short term actions should be directed to facilitate identifying high-risk patients and to develop a practice organization plan to organize chronic care and use digital channels for support, especially to vulnerable patients, during next waves of the epidemic.

BackgroundThe increasing prevalence of chronic diseases puts a high burden on the health care systems of Low and Middle Income Countries which are often not adapted to provide the care needed. Peer support programmes are promoted to address health system constraints. This case study analyses a peer educator diabetes programme in Cambodia, MoPoTsyo, from a health system’s perspective. Which strategies were used and how did these strategies change? How is the programme perceived?MethodsData were collected through semi-structured interviews with patients, MoPoTsyo staff and peer educators, contracted pharmacy staff and health workers, health care workers and non-contracted pharmacists and managers and policy makers at district, provincial and national level. Four areas were purposively selected to do the interviews. An inductive content analysis was done independently by two researchers.ResultsMoPoTsyo developed into three stages: a focus on diabetes self-management; a widening scope to ensure affordable medicines and access to other health care services; and aiming for sustainability through more integration with the Cambodian public system and further upscaling. All respondents acknowledged the peer educators’ role and competence in patient education, but their ideas about additional tasks and their place in the system differed. Indirectly involved stakeholders and district managers emphasized the particular roles and responsibilities of all actors in the system and the particular role of the peer educator in the community. MoPoTsyo’s diagnostics and laboratory services were perceived as useful, especially by patients and project staff. Respondents were positive about the revolving drug fund, but expressed concerns about its integration into the government system. The degree of collaboration between health care staff and peer educators varied.ConclusionMoPoTsyo responds to the needs of people with diabetes in Cambodia. Key success factors were: consistent focus on and involvement of the target group, backed up by a strong organisation; simultaneous reduction of other barriers to care; and the ongoing maintenance of relations at all levels within the health system. Despite resistance, MoPoTsyo has established a more balanced relationship between patients and health service providers, empowering patients to self-manage and access services that meet their needs.

No abstract

Patient–centered care (PCC) is increasingly recognized as a key dimension of quality healthcare, but unfortunately remains poorly implemented in practice. This paper explores the current state of PCC in sub-Saharan Africa and potential barriers to its implementation, with a focus on public first line health services. We develop an analytical framework based on expert knowledge, field experience, and a conceptual literature review. Factors contributing to the (lack of) implementation of PCC are structured in three distinct but interacting layers. The first layer encompasses factors that influence and shape the performance of providers.  The training of health workers is key in that respect. Training models remain dominated by a biomedical perspective, with little attention for psychosocial dimensions of the illness experience. The second layer of determinants relates to the structural and organizational features of the health system. The emphasis in many African health care systems on specific programmatic outputs, and the subsequent pressure this creates on health workers,  jeopardize the delivery of PCC. The third layer is related to the broader socioeconomic environment in which health workers operate. Noteworthy is the gap between the “official” norms in the public sector and the actual behavior of providers. We then propose  possible avenues for change for each of these three layers. We conclude by arguing the need for further fine-tuning of the framework outlined in this paper, investing in the contextual validation of measurement tools for PCC, and testing solutions in a participatory action research framework.

HighlightsReport of a randomised trial on an mHealth intervention in 3 low income countries.There was no additional effect of the text message self-management support.Coverage, routine care and disease progression interfere with the potential impact.

Background Process evaluation is increasingly recognized as an important component of effective implementation research and yet, there has been surprisingly little work to understand what constitutes best practice. Researchers use different methodologies describing causal pathways and understanding barriers and facilitators to implementation of interventions in diverse contexts and settings. We report on challenges and lessons learned from undertaking process evaluation of seven hypertension intervention trials funded through the Global Alliance of Chronic Diseases (GACD). Methods Preliminary data collected from the GACD hypertension teams in 2015 were used to inform a template for data collection. Case study themes included: (1) description of the intervention, (2) objectives of the process evaluation, (3) methods including theoretical basis, (4) main findings of the study and the process evaluation, (5) implications for the project, policy and research practice and (6) lessons for future process evaluations. The information was summarized and reported descriptively and narratively and key lessons were identified. Results The case studies were from low- and middle-income countries and Indigenous communities in Canada. They were implementation research projects with intervention arm. Six theoretical approaches were used but most comprised of mixed-methods approaches. Each of the process evaluations generated findings on whether interventions were implemented with fidelity, the extent of capacity building, contextual factors and the extent to which relationships between researchers and community impacted on intervention implementation. The most important learning was that although process evaluation is time consuming, it enhances understanding of factors affecting implementation of complex interventions. The research highlighted the need to initiate process evaluations early on in the project, to help guide design of the intervention; and the importance of effective communication between researchers responsible for trial implementation, process evaluation and outcome evaluation. Conclusion This research demonstrates the important role of process evaluation in understanding implementation process of complex interventions. This can help to highlight a broad range of system requirements such as new policies and capacity building to support implementation. Process evaluation is crucial in understanding contextual factors that may impact intervention implementation which is important in considering whether or not the intervention can be translated to other contexts. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s12889-019-7261-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

IntroductionMultimorbidity is a major public health challenge, with a rising prevalence in low/middle-income countries (LMICs). This review aims to systematically synthesise evidence on the prevalence, patterns and factors associated with multimorbidity of non-communicable diseases (NCDs) among adults residing in LMICs.MethodsWe conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of articles reporting prevalence, determinants, patterns of multimorbidity of NCDs among adults aged >18 years in LMICs. For the PROSPERO registered review, we searched PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane libraries for articles published from 2009 till 30 May 2020. Studies were included if they reported original research on multimorbidity of NCDs among adults in LMICs.ResultsThe systematic search yielded 3272 articles; 39 articles were included, with a total of 1 220 309 participants. Most studies used self-reported data from health surveys. There was a large variation in the prevalence of multimorbidity; 0.7%–81.3% with a pooled prevalence of 36.4% (95% CI 32.2% to 40.6%). Prevalence of multimorbidity increased with age, and random effect meta-analyses showed that female sex, OR (95% CI): 1.48, 1.33 to 1.64, being well-off, 1.35 (1.02 to 1.80), and urban residence, 1.10 (1.01 to 1.20), respectively were associated with higher odds of NCD multimorbidity. The most common multimorbidity patterns included cardiometabolic and cardiorespiratory conditions.ConclusionMultimorbidity of NCDs is an important problem in LMICs with higher prevalence among the aged, women, people who are well-off and urban dwellers. There is the need for longitudinal data to access the true direction of multimorbidity and its determinants, establish causation and identify how trends and patterns change over time.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42019133453.

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.