scholarly journals Workshop: Best practice portals for public health policies and interventions

2019 ◽  
Vol 29 (Supplement_4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Best Practices ◽  
Best Practice ◽  
Good Practice ◽  
Value Added ◽  
Added Value ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Policy And Practice ◽  
What Works ◽  
Successes And Challenges

Abstract Background To support policy and practice with evidence-based information, several countries have best practice portals for public health interventions. Some of the portals were started recently (France) and other portals exist already for several years now (Netherlands). All the countries face the same challenges, which relate to how to identify the relevant practices, the assessment of the practices (how to achieve an inclusive portal while maintaining high quality), and the implementation and the use of the practices by professionals and policymakers (integrity vs. adaptation of the best practices). In addition to best practice portals the organisations are also working on the development of What works approaches. Objective The organisers will share their experiences with the development and implementation of best practice portals, and discuss the successes and challenges with the workshop participants. Three countries (the Netherlands, France and Germany) will present the successes and challenges of their best practice portal, and, as an example of a joint European approach, EuroHealthNet will discuss both joint and independent approaches from a European perspective. At the end of the workshop we will discuss the challenges and invite other countries to share their experiences and successes with best practice portals and providing evidence for policy and practice. With the objective to: Present the procedure and the assessment criteria of evaluating practices for inclusion in the portalsPresent the implementation and the use of best practices as well as the acceptance of the portalsDiscuss the issues of integrity and adaptation and how to assess the core elements of effective interventionsDiscuss the development of what works approaches (description of evidence in a short and accessible way) and their added value to best practice portalsDiscuss the value added of best practice portals, including promotion of their use by professionals and policymakers Key messages This workshop will give participants insight into best practice portals developed across Europe. It will discuss how countries identify and select good practice and evidence-based preventive interventions as well as the successes and challenges of such portals.

scholarly journals 13.E. Workshop: How to improve the uptake of best practices?

2020 ◽  
Vol 30 (Supplement_5) ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Keyword(s):  
Health Promotion ◽  
Best Practices ◽  
Best Practice ◽  
General Information ◽  
Lessons Learned ◽  
Added Value ◽  
Prevention Programme ◽  
European Collaboration ◽  
Framework Conditions ◽  
Successes And Challenges

Abstract Background Several countries have a health promotion and disease prevention programme register (also known as good/best practice portal), designed with the aim of supporting policy and practice with evidence-based information. While some of the programme registers have been in use for many years (USA, the Netherlands, Germany, etc.), others have been established recently (France) or are even under development (Slovenia). Though there are differences in terms of categorising good/best practice, all prevention programme registers have many things in common, for instance submission and review processes. Another similarity lies in the common challenges by all programme registers, which relate to the question: “How to improve the uptake of good/best practices?”. Finding answers to this question might contribute to one of the major Public health challenges of today: The translation of evidence into practice. Objective The organisers of the workshop will present different strategies and approaches to improve the uptake of the prevention programme registers, and discuss the successes and challenges of different strategies with workshop participants, as experience shows that more is needed than just offering the prevention programme registers. Today we know that a range of framework conditions must be in place to ensure a supportive environment for the use of the portals. This starts with needs analysis, support in the selection of the most appropriate good/best practices and their transferability and goes as far as capacity building, incentivisation and fostering feedback on adaptations. In detail, the presentations will address: How to build capacity to best use good/best practice (by Netherlands); Whether and how a more comprehensive approach offering instruments for needs assessment, general information and good/best practice in one portal might facilitate uptake (by Germany); and Dissemination strategies: experience and lessons learned (by France) and the added value of European collaboration to improve the uptake of best practices and create a “centre of excellence” for health promotion portals in Europe with the objective to: discuss which framework conditions are most relevant to improve uptake of good/best practicesdiscuss successes and challenges of different strategies. Key messages This workshop will give participants insight into most relevant approaches and infrastructures to improve uptake of good/best practices. It will discuss which different strategies followed by several countries might be successful.

scholarly journals Innovative strategies for the implementation of best practices

2019 ◽  
Vol 29 (Supplement_4) ◽  
Author(s):  
D Van Dale ◽  
K Leenaars
Keyword(s):  
Health Promotion ◽  
Best Practices ◽  
Best Practice ◽  
Evidence Base ◽  
Local Context ◽  
Policy And Practice ◽  
Policy Makers ◽  
What Works ◽  
Prevention Interventions ◽  
Health Promotion Interventions

Abstract The Netherlands’ best practice portal for health promotion interventions includes approximately 350 interventions. The aim of the portal is to support policy and practice with evidence based information. There are five different levels to indicate the strength of their evidence base. In 2014, a study on the implementation of the best practices included in the portal showed that health promotion practitioners often do not implement them. One of the arguments given to opt for other interventions than those listed in the portal was the assumption that the ‘standard interventions’ will not fit their particular local context, and that adjusting a best practice is not possible. We will present the criteria and procedure of the assessment of the quality, effectiveness and the feasibility of health promotion interventions. There after we present two strategies to increase and improve the take up of best practice implementation. The first strategy is to describe and present the core elements of the interventions. This strategy facilitates the possibility for the sound adjustments of a best practice. The second strategy is to identify the common effective elements of a group of interventions, and present that information in an accessible way to policy-makers and practitioners. Effective elements were identified through systematic reviews in combination with focus group interviews with health promotion practitioners. The result is a What works document (What works, What probably works, What doesn’t work and What’s unclear). An example of the second strategy is a synthesis of the effective elements of fall prevention interventions. These elements were translated into a practical user’s guide, and illustrated with best practice interventions from the portal. Policy-makers and health promotion practitioners appreciated the new way of presenting the best practices.

scholarly journals Framework for selecting best practices in public health: a systematic literature review

2015 ◽  
Vol 4 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Eileen Ng ◽  
Pierpaolo De Colombani
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Literature Review ◽  
Best Practices ◽  
Best Practice ◽  
Health Interventions ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Public Health Interventions ◽  
Public Health Programmes ◽  
Health Programmes ◽  
Selection Of

Evidence-based public health has commonly relied on findings from empirical studies, or research-based evidence. However, this paper advocates that practice-based evidence derived from programmes implemented in real-life settings is likely to be a more suitable source of evidence for inspiring and guiding public health programmes. Selection of best practices from the array of implemented programmes is one way of generating such practice-based evidence. Yet the lack of consensus on the definition and criteria for practice-based evidence and best practices has limited their application in public health so far. To address the gap in literature on practice-based evidence, this paper hence proposes measures of success for public health interventions by developing an evaluation framework for selection of best practices. The proposed framework was synthesised from a systematic literature review of peer-reviewed and grey literature on existing evaluation frameworks for public health programmes as well as processes employed by health-related organisations when selecting best practices. A best practice is firstly defined as an intervention that has shown evidence of effectiveness in a particular setting and is likely to be replicable to other situations. Regardless of the area of public health, interventions should be evaluated by their context, process and outcomes. A best practice should hence meet most, if not all, of eight identified evaluation criteria: relevance, community participation, stakeholder collaboration, ethical soundness, replicability, effectiveness, efficiency and sustainability. Ultimately, a standardised framework for selection of best practices will improve the usefulness and credibility of practice-based evidence in informing evidence-based public health interventions.

scholarly journals 14.I. Workshop: Strengthening the impact of national health information systems in policy and practice

2020 ◽  
Vol 30 (Supplement_5) ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Best Practices ◽  
Health Information ◽  
Health Information Systems ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Policy And Practice ◽  
The Public ◽  
Public Health Reporting ◽  
The Impact

Abstract Health information (HI) includes data on population health, on health determinants, health care systems, and health-relevant policy developments. Duly prioritised HI is essential to inform decision-makers, researchers and the public. However, getting evidence into the hands of key stakeholders is still a challenge in many European countries. Depending on the respective target groups: decision-makers, clinical care providers, allied health professionals, health advocates and patients, various challenges arise for leveraging this data for intervention. While public health agencies aim to improve health for all, building bridges across stakeholder groups for a more efficient implementation of evidence-based recommendations requires concerted efforts and exchange of best practices and innovations in HI. This workshop aims to provide delegates with a clear understanding of the strategies that can strengthen the impact of national health information systems (HIS) in policy and practice. Within InfAct, the EU Joint Action on Health Information (InfAct), EU-Member States have taken significant steps towards building such an integrated infrastructure to advance the use of HI for analysis, decision-making and intervention. Five case examples of this consortium will be presented. The objectives are two-fold: 1) to provide delegates with an overview of the latest developments in public health reporting and monitoring across European countries, and 2) to present solutions that focus on strengthening the impact of national HIS in policy and practice. The workshop will begin with an introduction to national strategies that have been implemented across Europe to identify and prioritise HI needs; good practice recommendations for public health reporting will also be provided. At EU level, the 88 European Core Health Indicators (ECHI) have been widely adopted to provide a 'snapshot' of European public health (including care), and we will explore the future of the ECHI list in guiding decision-makers. There is also increasing interest on how to facilitate the uptake of evidence in the health system but also across sectors; this relies on taking into account the broader socio-political context and envisioning new partnerships with civil society and non-state actors. Therefore, our workshop will explore the latest developments in monitoring knowledge integration into national policies and civil society. Dialogue on what can be done, and what is needed for better knowledge management will be fueled by an interactive voting poll during the session. The Mentimeter poll will prompt the audience to share, in real time, their perspectives and expectations for HI production, dissemination and use across countries. For example, on the role of health literacy in facilitating the implementation of evidence-based recommendations. The delegates will take the perspective of the public, the public health researcher and the health policy maker in this. Key messages Mapping health information (HI) priorities and reporting approaches across countries facilitates the exchange of best practices in the context of building a sustainable EU Health Information system. The future EU distributed research infrastructure on population health (DIPoH) may hold a key role in informing national and EU-level interventions in health policy and practice.

scholarly journals A more comprehensive approach offering instruments in one portal to facilitate higher uptake

2020 ◽  
Vol 30 (Supplement_5) ◽  
Author(s):  
C Rossmann ◽  
F De Bock
Keyword(s):  
Health Promotion ◽  
Best Practice ◽  
Evidence Synthesis ◽  
Good Practice ◽  
Community Setting ◽  
Comprehensive Approach ◽  
Added Value ◽  
Assessment Instruments ◽  
Policy Makers ◽  
Activity Promotion

Abstract The good practice portal of the Federal Centre for Health Education (BZgA) consists of a nationwide collection of projects and interventions to promote the health of socially disadvantaged groups at community/setting level. An exchange platform (inforo) is also offered via the operating agency, although its use is still limited. The results of the evaluation of the platform suggest that the provision of practical projects and exchange of knowledge alone is not sufficient to support policy makers and practitioners who want to promote health in the community/setting. There is a need for advice on needs assessment, selection and appropriate implementation of health promotion measures. A comprehensive approach currently being tested in the field of activity promotion for older people is the provision of a web-based “toolbox” comprising the following tools: assessment instruments for analysing the need for health promotion measures, a user-friendly intervention/project database and broader evidence synthesis documents, as well as information on project management (organisational, legal, financial). Following the example of other best practice portals, a ranking methodology was developed to make the level of effectiveness of interventions visible and the evaluation requirements transparent. Evidence synthesis documents provide an entry point to learn more generally what works in a particular area of health promotion. In order to make the “toolbox” accessible to policy-makers and practitioners, information from previous studies was used in the development with regard to content and graphical presentation. BZgA is currently working on integrating evidence into the good practice portal. The evaluation of the toolbox in a small area of health promotion will provide initial insights into the inclusion of evidence and its added value. This presentation will conclude with a discussion of possibilities for improvement, challenges and limitations of this approach.

scholarly journals Engaging Multidisciplinary Stakeholders to Drive Shared Decision-Making in Oncology

2018 ◽  
Vol 34 (1) ◽  
pp. 29-31 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gabrielle Rocque ◽  
Ellen Miller-Sonnet ◽  
Alan Balch ◽  
Carrie Stricker ◽  
Josh Seidman ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Best Practices ◽  
Shared Decision Making ◽  
Best Practice ◽  
Care Delivery ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Shared Decision ◽  
Oncology Practice ◽  
Development And Validation

Although recognized as best practice, regular integration of shared decision-making (SDM) approaches between patients and oncologists remains an elusive goal. It is clear that usable, feasible, and practical tools are needed to drive increased SDM in oncology. To address this goal, we convened a multidisciplinary collaborative inclusive of experts across the health-care delivery ecosystem to identify key principles in designing and testing processes to promote SDM in routine oncology practice. In this commentary, we describe 3 best practices for addressing challenges associated with implementing SDM that emerged from a multidisciplinary collaborative: (1) engagement of diverse stakeholders who have interest in SDM, (2) development and validation of an evidence-based SDM tool grounded within an established conceptual framework, and (3) development of the necessary roadmap and consideration of the infrastructure needed for engendering patient engagement in decision-making. We believe these 3 principles are critical to the success of creating SDM tools to be utilized both within and outside of clinical practice. We are optimistic that shared use across settings will support adoption of this tool and overcome barriers to implementing SDM within busy clinical workflows. Ultimately, we hope that this work will offer new perspectives on what is important to patients and provide an important impetus for leveraging patient preferences and values in decision-making.

scholarly journals Master of public health practicum: Global trends and current practices.

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hannah Gummeson ◽  
Sonika Raj Goel ◽  
Khalifa Elmusharaf
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Health Education ◽  
Experiential Learning ◽  
Best Practices ◽  
Best Practice ◽  
Public Health Education ◽  
Health Programs ◽  
Public Health Programs ◽  
Master Of Public Health ◽  
Study Results

Abstract Background The field of graduate public health (GPH) education currently lacks clear, universal criteria for the integration of practice-based elements into the curriculum. The concept of the ‘practicum’ is well endorsed and there is a growing recognition that experiential learning is a crucial aspect of career development for the next generation of public health professionals, benefiting not only students, but also the profession and communities it serves. However, many leading academic institutions continue to emphasize research over experiential learning in public health, making practicums much less commonplace in education centers across the globe. Methods The purpose of this research was to review global best practices in graduate public health program design in order to identify commonalities and use the findings to inform practicum development.Data collection for this research was entirely web-based. Practicum guidelines from a globally diverse sample of graduate public health programs were reviewed. Data was compiled from universities’ websites and available online sources and collated into an Excel file. Descriptive statistics were computed for each study variable.Results We screened 108 graduate public health programs and 35 eligible programs were included in the study. Results were reported according to prerequisites & practicum scheduling, practicum contact hours & duration, credit hours & overall credit weighting, competencies, supervision, written agreement, objectives & deliverables, and approach to assessment. This research resulted in 13 recommendations intended to guide graduate public health practicum design. Based on the analysis of current best practice, the recommendations address the following four key domains: practicum design, mentorship & supervision, learning outcomes and evaluation. Conclusions This research demonstrates a global recognition of the benefit of practice experience in graduate public health education. However, the integration of practical components into curricula is inconsistent when viewed through a global lens. There is also significant variation in the structure of existing practical components. We propose that this study be utilized as a tool spark a global dialogue about best practices in graduate public health education through the identification common practices and opportunities for improvement.

Evidence-Based Best Practices Collections

2011 ◽  
pp. 280-287 ◽  
Author(s):  
Forrest Shull ◽  
Raimund Feldmann ◽  
Michelle Shaw ◽  
Michelle Lambert
Keyword(s):  
Knowledge Management ◽  
Best Practices ◽  
Competitive Advantage ◽  
Driving Force ◽  
Best Practice ◽  
General Concept ◽  
Lessons Learned ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Specific Knowledge ◽  
White Board

For capturing and transferring knowledge between different projects and organizations, the concept of a Best Practice is commonly used. A similar but more general concept for knowledge capturing is often referred to as a Lesson Learned. Both best practices and lessons learned are frequently organized in the form of knowledge collections. Such collections exist in many forms and flavours: From simple notes on a white board, to paper file collections on a shelf, to electronic versions filed in a common folder or shared drive, to systematically archived and standardized versions in experience and databases, or even specific knowledge management systems. In the past few decades, many organizations have invested much time and effort in such specific knowledge collections (e.g., databases, experience repositories) for best practices and/ or lessons learned. The driving force behind all these activities is to disseminate knowledge about proven solutions to their workforce. Ultimately, the goal is to avoid mistakes and improve the overall workflow and processes to possibly save money and gain a competitive advantage.

scholarly journals Making evidence and policy in public health emergencies: lessons from COVID-19 for adaptive evidence-making and intervention

2020 ◽  
Vol 16 (3) ◽  
pp. 477-490 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kari Lancaster ◽  
Tim Rhodes ◽  
Marsha Rosengarten
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Rapid Assessment ◽  
Social Practices ◽  
Knowledge Generation ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Multiple Forms ◽  
Policy And Practice ◽  
Public Health Emergencies ◽  
Key Points ◽  
Speed Up

Background:In public health emergencies, evidence, intervention, decisions and translation proceed simultaneously, in greatly compressed timeframes, with knowledge and advice constantly in flux. Idealised approaches to evidence-based policy and practice are ill equipped to deal with the uncertainties arising in evolving situations of need. Key points for discussion:There is much to learn from rapid assessment and outbreak science approaches. These emphasise methodological pluralism, adaptive knowledge generation, intervention pragmatism, and an understanding of health and intervention as situated in their practices of implementation. The unprecedented challenges of novel viral outbreaks like COVID-19 do not simply require us to speed up existing evidence-based approaches, but necessitate new ways of thinking about how a more emergent and adaptive evidence-making might be done. The COVID-19 pandemic requires us to appraise critically what constitutes ‘evidence-enough’ for iterative rapid decisions in-the-now. There are important lessons for how evidence and intervention co-emerge in social practices, and for how evidence-making and intervening proceeds through dialogue incorporating multiple forms of evidence and expertise. Conclusions and implications:Rather than treating adaptive evidence-making and decision making as a break from the routine, we argue that this should be a defining feature of an ‘evidence-making intervention’ approach to health.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document