No abstract

BackgroundTrust is critical to generate and maintain demand for vaccines in low and middle income countries. However, there is little documentation on how health system insufficiencies affect trust in vaccination and the process of re-building trust once it has been compromised. We reflect on how disruptions to immunizations systems can affect trust in vaccination and can compromise vaccine utilization. We then explore key pathways for overcoming system vulnerabilities in order to restore trust, to strengthen the resilience of health systems and communities, and to promote vaccine utilization.MethodsUtilizing secondary data and a review of the literature, we developed a causal loop diagram (CLD) to map the determinants of building trust in immunizations. Using the CLD, we devised three scenarios to illustrate common vulnerabilities that compromise trust and pathways to strengthen trust and utilization of vaccines, specifically looking at weak health systems, harmful communication channels, and role of social capital. Spill-over effects, interactions and other dynamics in the CLD were then examined to assess leverage points to counter these vulnerabilities.ResultsTrust in vaccination arises from the interactions among experiences with the health system, the various forms of communication and social capital – both external and internal to communities. When experiencing system-wide shocks such as the case in Ebola-affected countries, distrust is reinforced by feedback between the health and immunization systems where distrust often lingers even after systems are restored and spills over beyond vaccination in the broader health system. Vaccine myths or anti-vaccine movements reinforce distrust. Social capital – the collective value of social networks of community members – plays a central role in increasing levels of trust.ConclusionsTrust is important, yet underexplored, in the context of vaccine utilization. Using a CLD to illustrate various scenarios helped to explore how common health and vaccine vulnerabilities can reinforce and spill over distrust through vicious, reinforcing feedback. Restoring trust requires a careful balance between eliminating vulnerabilities and strengthening social capital and interactions among communication channels.

IntroductionWhile efforts to achieve Universal Health Coverage (UHC) and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) have reinvigorated interest in multisectoral collaborations (MSCs) among the global health and development community, there remains a plethora of questions about how best to conceptualise, plan, implement, evaluate and sustain MSCs. The objective of this paper is to present research priorities on MSC for health from researchers and policymakers around the globe, with an emphasis on low-income and middle-income countries.MethodsThe authors identified 30 priority research questions from two sources: (1) 38 review articles on MSC for health, and (2) interviews and focus groups with a total of 81 policymakers, including government officials (largely from ministries of health and state/provincial departments of health, but also offices of planning, public service, social development, the prime minister and others), large multilateral or bilateral organisations, and non-governmental organisations. In a third phase, questions were refined and ranked by a diverse group of researchers from around the globe using an online voting platform.ResultsThe top-ranked questions focused predominantly on pragmatic questions, such as how best to structure, implement and sustain MSCs, as well as how to build stakeholder capacity and community partnerships. Despite substantial variation between review articles, policymakers’ reflections and online ranking by researchers, two topics emerged as research priorities for all three: (1) leadership, partnership and governance structures for MSCs; and (2) MSC implementation strategies and mechanisms. The review articles underscored the need for more guidance on appropriate study designs and methods for investigating MSCs, which may be a prerequisite for other identified research priorities.ConclusionThese findings could inform efforts within and beyond the health sector to better align research objectives and funding with the evidence needs of policymakers grappling with questions about how best to leverage MSCs to achieve UHC and the SDGs.

We describe a 15-year experience with the double-switch operation using a modified atrial switch procedure with favorable midterm results. The risks of the hemi-mustard and bidirectional Glenn operation are minimal and are limited to a well-defined patient subset. The benefits include prolonged conduit life, reduced baffle- and sinus node-related complications, and technical simplicity.

This study summarises research- and practice-based evidence on home-based chemotherapy, and explores existing delivery models. A three-pronged investigation was conducted consisting of a literature review and synthesis of 54 papers, a review of seven home-based chemotherapy programmes spanning four countries, and two case studies within the Canadian province of Ontario. The results support the provision of home-based chemotherapy as a safe and patient-centred alternative to hospital- and outpatient-based service. This paper consolidates information on home-based chemotherapy programmes including services and drugs offered, patient eligibility criteria, patient views and experiences, delivery structures and processes, and common challenges. Fourteen recommendations are also provided for improving the delivery of chemotherapy in patients' homes by prioritising patient-centredness, provider training and teamwork, safety and quality of care, and programme management. The results of this study can be used to inform the development of an evidence-informed model for the delivery of chemotherapy and related care, such as symptom management, in patients' homes.