No abstract

Improving community capacity for influencing actions on the determinants of health is an immediate outcome of many Public Health Agency of Canada-funding community-based programs. Despite the importance of this outcome, it has been difficult to measure and describe the contribution of funding programs to improving community capacity. This paper reports on a study conducted to develop and establish the psychometric properties of scales that measure community capacity to address health issues in the context of federally funded community-based programs. A literature review and national think tank with 21 experts informed the development of the first draft of the scales that outlined nine key domains of community capacity. Two focus groups with community practitioners provided information on the face and content validity and general usability of this draft instrument. The revised instrument was sent for pilot testing to 114 community organizations. Qualitative and quantitative analyses were performed to assess the validity, reliability and usability of the instrument. Twenty-nine organizations returned a completed instrument (25% response rate). Principal Component Analysis confirmed scale unidimensionality for eight multi-item scales: all of the component loadings were considered good with all scales loading between 0.60 and 0.92. Scale internal consistency was also considered high with alphas between 0.72 and 0.86 for six of these eight scales. Spearman's correlations were significant for the remaining two multi-item scales (composed of two items each), indicating that the two items for each scale were significantly correlated to each other. One scale could not be analyzed quantitatively, as it contained only a single item. Triangulation of qualitative and quantitative results found consistency in interpretations of scale response sets. Feedback on the instrument indicated interest in using it for project planning and evaluation. Psychometric analyses and triangulation provided evidence of the construct validity and reliability of the instrument. The final instrument covers 9 domains and has a total of 26 items, each with a four-point rating scale and a section for qualitative contextual comments. The instrument provides quantitative and qualitative information on community capacity within the context and scope of community-based funding programs.

International comparative studies constitute a highly valuable contribution to public policy research. Analysing different policy designs offers not only a mean of knowing the phenomenon itself but also gives us insightful clues on how to improve existing practices. Although much of the work carried out in this realm relies on quantitative appraisal of the data contained in international databases or collected from institutional websites, countless topics may simply not be studied using this type of methodological design due to, for instance, the lack of reliable databases, sparse or diffuse sources of information, etc. Here then we discuss the use of the qualitative descriptive approach as a methodological tool to obtain data on how policies are structured. We propose the use of online qualitative surveys with key stakeholders from each relevant national context in order to retrieve the fundamental pieces of information on how a certain public policy is addressed there. Starting from Sandelowski’s seminal paper on qualitative descriptive studies, we conduct a theoretical reflection on the current methodological proposition. We argue that a researcher engaged in this endeavour acts like a composite-sketch artist collecting pieces of information from witnesses in order to draw a valid depiction of reality. Furthermore, we discuss the most relevant aspects involving sampling, data collection and data analysis in this context. Overall, this methodological design has a great potential for allowing researchers to expand the international analysis of public policies to topics hitherto little appraised from this perspective.

Across a range of health care systems there is a responsibility placed on meso-level budget holders to set priorities and allocate resources within constrained budgets. The literature suggests that these organizations have typically defaulted to historical and/or political processes for decision making. Whilst the literature on resource allocation in health care attests to the political nature of decision making, this has remained largely under-theorized and therefore priority setters may be unfamiliar with the analytic benefits of applying insights from the broader political sciences. Conversely, policy scientists may know relatively little about existing research on how healthcare Downloaded from organizations make allocative and redistributive decisions. This paper aims to open a dialogue between these solitudes by exploring political effects on health care priority setting, using the interpretive concepts ideas, interests and institutions.

Background: To date there has been relatively little published about how research priorities are set, and even less about methods by which decision-makers can be engaged in defining a relevant and appropriate research agenda. We report on a recent effort in British Columbia to have researchers and decision-makers jointly establish an agenda for future research into questions of resource allocation.

No abstract

Although the costs of doctors' visits and hospital stays in Canada are covered by national public health insurance, the cost of outpatient prescription drugs is not. To solve problems of access, Canadian provinces have introduced provincial prescription drug benefit programs. This study analyzes the prescription drug policymaking process in five Canadian provinces between 1992 and 2004 with a view to (1) determining the federal government's role in the area of prescription drugs; (2) describing the policymaking process; (3) identifying factors in each province's choice of a policy; (4) identifying patterns in those factors across the five provinces; and (5) assessing the federal government's influence on the policies chosen. Analysis shows that despite significant differences in policy choices, the ideological motivations of the provinces were unexpectedly similar. The findings also highlight the importance of institutional factors, for example, in provinces' decision to compete rather than to collaborate. We conclude that, to date, Canada's federalism laboratory has only partly benefited the Canadian public. Cost pressures may, however, eventually overcome barriers to cooperation between the provincial and the federal governments, enabling them to capitalize on Canada's federal structure to improve the accessibility and affordability of drugs.

Moral distress is a concept used to date in clinical literature to describe the experience of staff in circumstances in which they are prevented from delivering the kind of bedside care they believe is expected of them, professionally and ethically. Our research objective was to determine if this concept has relevance in terms of key health care managerial functions, such as priority setting and resource allocation. We conducted interviews and focus groups with mid- and senior-level managers in two British Columbia (Canada) health authorities. Transcripts were analyzed qualitatively using constant comparison to identify key themes related to moral distress. Both mid- and senior-level managers appear to experience moral distress, with both similarities and differences in how their experiences manifest. Several examples of this concept were identified including the obligation to communicate or 'sell' organizational decisions or policies with which a manager personally may disagree and situations where scarce resources compel managers to place staff in situations where they meet with predictable and potentially avoidable risks. Given that moral distress appears to be a relevant issue for at least some health care managers, further research is warranted into its exact nature, prevalence, and possible organizational and personal responses.