scholarly journals Commentary: Policy Implementation Science - An Unexplored Strategy to Address Social Determinants of Health

2021 ◽  
Vol 31 (1) ◽  
pp. 133-138
Author(s):  
Karen M. Emmons ◽  
David A. Chambers

This commentary explores the ways in which robust research focused on policy implementation will increase our ability to understand how to – and how not to – ad­dress social determinants of health.We make three key points in this commen­tary. First, policies that affect our lives and health are developed and implemented every single day, like it or not. These include “small p” policies, such as those at our workplaces that influence whether we have affordable access to healthy food at work, as well as “large P” policies that, for example, determine at a larger level whether our children’s schools are required to provide physical education. However, policies interact with context and are likely to have differential effects across different groups based on demographics, socioeconomic sta­tus, geography, and culture. We are unlikely to improve health equity if we do not begin to systematically evaluate the ways in which policies can incorporate evidence-based approaches to reducing inequities and to provide structural supports needed for such interventions to have maximal impact. A policy mandating physical education in schools will do little to address disparities in fitness and weight-related outcomes if all schools cannot provide the resources for physical education teachers and safe activity spaces.Second, as we argue for an increased emphasis on policy implementation science, we acknowledge its nascent status. Although the field of implementation science has be­come increasingly robust in the past decade, there has been only limited application to policy. However, if we are strategic and systematic in application of implementation science approaches and methods to health-related policy, there is great opportunity to discover its impact on social determinants. This will entail fundamental work to de­velop common measures of policy-relevant implementation processes and outcomes, to develop the capacity to track policy proposal outcomes, and to maximize our capacity to study natural experiments of policy implementation.Third, development of an explicit policy implementation science agenda focused on health equity is critical. This will include efforts to bridge scientific evidence and policy adoption and implementation, to evaluate policy impact on a range of health equity outcomes, and to examine differen­tial effects of varied policy implementation processes across population groups.We cannot escape the reality that policy influences health and health equity. Policy implementation science can have an important bearing in understanding how policy impacts can be health-promoting and equitable.Ethn Dis. 2021;31(1):133-138; doi:10.18865/ed.31.1.133

2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ross C. Brownson ◽  
Shiriki K. Kumanyika ◽  
Matthew W. Kreuter ◽  
Debra Haire-Joshu

Abstract Background There is growing urgency to tackle issues of equity and justice in the USA and worldwide. Health equity, a framing that moves away from a deficit mindset of what society is doing poorly (disparities) to one that is positive about what society can achieve, is becoming more prominent in health research that uses implementation science approaches. Equity begins with justice—health differences often reflect societal injustices. Applying the perspectives and tools of implementation science has potential for immediate impact to improve health equity. Main text We propose a vision and set of action steps for making health equity a more prominent and central aim of implementation science, thus committing to conduct implementation science through equity-focused principles to achieve this vision in U.S. research and practice. We identify and discuss challenges in current health disparities approaches that do not fully consider social determinants. Implementation research challenges are outlined in three areas: limitations of the evidence base, underdeveloped measures and methods, and inadequate attention to context. To address these challenges, we offer recommendations that seek to (1) link social determinants with health outcomes, (2) build equity into all policies, (3) use equity-relevant metrics, (4) study what is already happening, (5) integrate equity into implementation models, (6) design and tailor implementation strategies, (7) connect to systems and sectors outside of health, (8) engage organizations in internal and external equity efforts, (9) build capacity for equity in implementation science, and (10) focus on equity in dissemination efforts. Conclusions Every project in implementation science should include an equity focus. For some studies, equity is the main goal of the project and a central feature of all aspects of the project. In other studies, equity is part of a project but not the singular focus. In these studies, we should, at a minimum, ensure that we “leave no one behind” and that existing disparities are not widened. With a stronger commitment to health equity from funders, researchers, practitioners, advocates, evaluators, and policy makers, we can harvest the rewards of the resources being invested in health-related research to eliminate disparities, resulting in health equity.


2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (11) ◽  
pp. 1972-1979
Author(s):  
Karen M Emmons ◽  
David Chambers ◽  
Ali Abazeed

Abstract Although health-related policies are abundant, efforts to understand how to ensure that these policies serve as an effective vehicle for translating scientific evidence are relatively sparse. This paper explores how policy-focused implementation science (IS) may contribute to understanding the translation of scientific evidence to health-related policy in governmental and nongovernmental sectors. Expanding the focus of implementation science in cancer control could systematically address policy to both increase the use of scientific evidence in general and to address health equity. In this Commentary, we look to relevant work outside of IS that could be informative, most notably from the field of political science. We propose several ideas for future research that could help move the field of policy implementation science in cancer control in the USA forward. Although most efforts to increase uptake of the scientific evidence base reference translation to “practice and policy,” there has been relatively little emphasis in the USA on implementation at the policy level, especially related to cancer control. If we are to achieve the full benefits of scientific discovery on population and public health, we will need to consider policy as a critical mechanism by which evidence can be translated to practice. We have a robust set of methods within implementation science that are increasing the pace of adoption and maintenance of evidence-based programs in a variety of settings. Building on these efforts, the time is right to expand our focus to include policy implementation.


Author(s):  
Quyen Phan ◽  
Naomi Johnson ◽  
JoAnna Hillman ◽  
Daniel Geller ◽  
Laura P. Kimble ◽  
...  

AbstractObjectiveFor nursing students, competency in population health management involves acquiring knowledge and forming attitudes about the impact of the social determinants of health (SDoH) on health equity. The purpose of this pilot study was to assess nursing students’ knowledge and attitudes about the SDoH and health equity following a focused simulation activity.MethodBaccalaureate nursing students (N=182) participated in a ninety-minute health equity simulation and a post-simulation debrief. Forty-four students (23%) completed a 19-item post-simulation survey.ResultsSixty-four percent of participants reported positive attitude change in working with marginalized populations caused by the SDoH, and 89% reported being knowledgeable about the role of the registered nurse in addressing health equity. Seventy-five percent reported enhanced knowledge of the SDoH through the health equity simulation.ConclusionUsing health equity simulation may be effective in enhancing students’ knowledge, as well as their attitudes in caring for the health of marginalized populations by addressing the SDoH.


2021 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Gabriella M. McLoughlin ◽  
Peg Allen ◽  
Callie Walsh-Bailey ◽  
Ross C. Brownson

Abstract Background Governments in some countries or states/provinces mandate school-based policies intended to improve the health and well-being of primary and secondary students and in some cases the health of school staff. Examples include mandating a minimum time spent per week in programmed physical activity, mandating provision of healthy foods and limiting fat content of school meals, and banning tobacco products or use on school campuses. Although school health researchers have studied whether schools, districts, or states/provinces are meeting requirements, it is unclear to what extent implementation processes and determinants are assessed. The purposes of the present systematic review of quantitative measures of school policy implementation were to (1) identify quantitative school health policy measurement tools developed to measure implementation at the school, district, or state/provincial levels; (2) describe the policy implementation outcomes and determinants assessed and identify the trends in measurement; and (3) assess pragmatic and psychometric properties of identified implementation measures to understand their quality and suitability for broader application. Methods Peer-reviewed journal articles published 1995–2020 were included if they (1) had multiple-item quantitative measures of school policy implementation and (2) addressed overall wellness, tobacco, physical activity, nutrition, obesity prevention, or mental health/bullying/social-emotional learning. The final sample comprised 86 measurement tools from 67 peer-review articles. We extracted study characteristics, such as psychometric and pragmatic measure properties, from included articles based on three frameworks: (1) Implementation Outcomes Framework, (2) Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research, and (3) Policy Implementation Determinants Framework. Results Most implementation tools were developed to measure overall wellness policies which combined multiple policy topics (n = 35, 40%) and were in survey form (n = 75, 87%). Fidelity was the most frequently prevalent implementation outcome (n = 70, 81%), followed by adoption (n = 32, 81%). The implementation determinants most assessed were readiness for implementation, including resources (n = 43, 50%), leadership (n = 42, 49%), and policy communication (n = 41, 48%). Overall, measures were low-cost and had easy readability. However, lengthy tools and lack of reported validity/reliability data indicate low transferability. Conclusions Implementation science can contribute to more complete and rigorous assessment of school health policy implementation processes, which can improve implementation strategies and ultimately the intended health benefits. Several high-quality measures of implementation determinants and implementation outcomes can be applied to school health policy implementation assessment. Dissemination and implementation science researchers can also benefit from measurement experiences of school health researchers.


Author(s):  
Alejandra Hernando-Garijo ◽  
David Hortigüela-Alcalá ◽  
Pedro Antonio Sánchez-Miguel ◽  
Sixto González-Víllora

The implementation of pedagogical models (PMs) in the subject of Physical Education (PE) is presented as a pedagogical approach that is based on the educational context as a means to overcome the serious limitations that arise from traditional approaches. The effective implementation of this approach has demonstrated benefits in terms of student motivation, student involvement and improved learning. Thus, its application and international relevance, the variability of content covered, the possibility of replicability in a variety of contexts and the fact that it favors a reflective framework and common action by teachers are some of the reasons that justify its use. In this sense, the need for teacher training, as well as the intention to generate more scientific evidence based on its application in the classroom, are some of the key aspects to be taken into account for its implementation and consequent consolidation in the educational field.


2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (5) ◽  
pp. 2902-2915
Author(s):  
Xia Liu

Objectives: AHP (Analytic Hierarchy Process) is used to analyze the influencing factors of school physical education policy implementation. Methods: Based on the established hierarchical structure model of influencing factors of school physical education policy implementation, the importance of indicators in each level is compared in pairs, the judgment matrix is established step by step, the relative importance order weight of each level element is calculated, and the consistency test is carried out, and then the ranking of each level and the general ranking are obtained. Results: The results show that the principal, as the first responsible person for the implementation of school sports policy, plays a directional decisive role in the implementation of school sports policy. Organizational mechanism and funding guarantee factors are necessary conditions for the implementation of school sports policy, and school sports policy factors are a powerful driving force for the implementation of school sports policy. Conclusion: AHP provides theoretical reference for better understanding the influencing factors of school physical education policy implementation and putting forward corresponding intervention measures.


2021 ◽  
Vol 2 ◽  
pp. 263348952110494
Author(s):  
Rachel C. Shelton ◽  
Prajakta Adsul ◽  
April Oh ◽  
Nathalie Moise ◽  
Derek M. Griffith

Background Despite the promise of implementation science (IS) to reduce health inequities, critical gaps and opportunities remain in the field to promote health equity. Prioritizing racial equity and antiracism approaches is critical in these efforts, so that IS does not inadvertently exacerbate disparities based on the selection of frameworks, methods, interventions, and strategies that do not reflect consideration of structural racism and its impacts. Methods Grounded in extant research on structural racism and antiracism, we discuss the importance of advancing understanding of how structural racism as a system shapes racial health inequities and inequitable implementation of evidence-based interventions among racially and ethnically diverse communities. We outline recommendations for explicitly applying an antiracism lens to address structural racism and its manifests through IS. An anti-racism lens provides a framework to guide efforts to confront, address, and eradicate racism and racial privilege by helping people identify racism as a root cause of health inequities and critically examine how it is embedded in policies, structures, and systems that differentially affect racially and ethnically diverse populations. Results We provide guidance for the application of an antiracism lens in the field of IS, focusing on select core elements in implementation research, including: (1) stakeholder engagement; (2) conceptual frameworks and models; (3) development, selection, adaptation of EBIs; (4) evaluation approaches; and (5) implementation strategies. We highlight the need for foundational grounding in antiracism frameworks among implementation scientists to facilitate ongoing self-reflection, accountability, and attention to racial equity, and provide questions to guide such reflection and consideration. Conclusion We conclude with a reflection on how this is a critical time for IS to prioritize focus on justice, racial equity, and real-world equitable impact. Moving IS towards making consideration of health equity and an antiracism lens foundational is central to strengthening the field and enhancing its impact. Plain language abstract There are important gaps and opportunities that exist in promoting health equity through implementation science. Historically, the commonly used frameworks, measures, interventions, strategies, and approaches in the field have not been explicitly focused on equity, nor do they consider the role of structural racism in shaping health and inequitable delivery of evidence-based practices/programs. This work seeks to build off of the long history of research on structural racism and health, and seeks to provide guidance on how to apply an antiracism lens to select core elements of implementation research. We highlight important opportunities for the field to reflect and consider applying an antiracism approach in: 1) stakeholder/community engagement; 2) use of conceptual frameworks; 3) development, selection and adaptation of evidence-based interventions; 4) evaluation approaches; 5) implementation strategies (e.g., how to deliver evidence-based practices, programs, policies); and 6) how researchers conduct their research, with a focus on racial equity. This is an important time for the field of implementation science to prioritize a foundational focus on justice, equity, and real-world impact through the application of an anti-racism lens in their work.


Author(s):  
Bo Burström

This commentary refers to the article by Fisher et al on lessons from Australian primary healthcare (PHC), which highlights the role of PHC to reduce non-communicable diseases (NCDs) and promote health equity. This commentary discusses important elements and features when aiming for health equity, including going beyond the healthcare system and focusing on the social determinants of health in public health policies, in PHC and in the healthcare system as a whole, to reduce NCDs. A wider biopsychosocial view on health is needed, recognizing the importance of social determinants of health, and inequalities in health. Public funding and universal access to care are important prerequisites, but regulation is needed to ensure equitable access in practice. An example of a PHC reform in Sweden indicates that introducing market solutions in a publicly funded PHC system may not benefit those with greater needs and may reduce the impact of PHC on population health.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document