Veille évaluations

Guide pratique « Évaluer les politiques locales d’égalité femmes-hommes » Centre Hubertine Auclert

20 décembre 2022

Ce guide sur l’évaluation des politiques d’égalité entre les femmes et les hommes est centré sur les politiques publiques et la mise en œuvre de démarches spécifiques ou intégrées de l’égalité femmes-hommes. Par conséquent, il ne traite ni de l’évaluation de la politique sur l’égalité professionnelle en interne, ni de la prise en compte du genre dans l’évaluation des autres politiques publiques 

EN SAVOIR PLUS / https://www.centre-hubertine-auclert.fr/sites/default/files/fichiers/cha-guide-a5-pol-locale-egalite-fh-web.pdf


La démarche qualité - Outils à destination des professionnels du secteur médico-social

20 décembre 2022

La démarche qualité, c’est quoi ?Il existe, sur ce concept, souvent une méconnaissance, parfois des idées reçues.Le groupe FORAP médico-social s’est mobilisé pour construire des supports afin de permettre aux ESSMS de s’approprier les principes de la démarche qualité.Nous vous proposons ainsi 2 posters qui s’appuient sur une démarche en 4 étapes « Planifier, Réaliser, Vérifier, Améliorer ». Chacune des étapes est illustrée par des exemples opérationnels afin de faciliter la compréhension et l’appropriation par tous.2 posters sont disponibles en accès libre :- Poster à destination de l’encadrement- Poster à destination des professionnels de terrain et des personnes accompagnées...

EN SAVOIR PLUS / https://www.forap.fr/nouveaux-outils-a-destination-des-professionnels-du-secteur-medico-social

mHealth Technology Design and Evaluation for Early Childhood Health Promotion: Systematic Literature Review

07 novembre 2022

JMIR Pediatr Parent. 2022 Oct 6;5(4):e37718. doi: 10.2196/37718.

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Recent increases in smartphone ownership among underserved populations have inspired researchers in medicine, computing, and health informatics to design and evaluate mobile health (mHealth) interventions, specifically for those supporting child development and growth. Although these interventions demonstrate possible effectiveness at larger scales, few of these interventions are evaluated to address racial disparities and health equity, which are known factors that affect relevance, uptake, and adherence in target populations.

OBJECTIVE: In this study, we aimed to identify and document the current design and evaluation practices of mHealth technologies that promote early childhood health, with a specific focus on opportunities for those processes to address health disparities and health equity.

METHODS: We completed a systematic literature review of studies that design and evaluate mHealth interventions for early childhood health promotion. We then analyzed these studies to identify opportunities to address racial disparities in early- and late-stage processes and to understand the potential efficacy of these interventions.

RESULTS: Across the literature from medical, computing, and health informatics fields, we identified 15 articles that presented a design or evaluation of a parent-facing health intervention. We found that using mobile-based systems to deliver health interventions was generally well accepted by parents of children aged <5 years. We also found that, when measured, parenting knowledge of early childhood health topics and confidence to engage in health-promoting behaviors improved. Design and evaluation methods held internal consistency within disciplines (eg, experimental study designs were the most prevalent in medical literature, while computing researchers used user-centered design methods in computing fields). However, there is little consistency in design or evaluation methods across fields.

CONCLUSIONS: To support more interventions with a comprehensive design and evaluation process, we recommend attention to design at the intervention (eg, reporting content sources) and system level; interdisciplinary collaboration in early childhood health intervention development can lead to large-scale deployment and success among populations.

TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42022359797; https://tinyurl.com/586nx9a2.

PMID:36201391 | DOI:10.2196/37718

Effectiveness of interventions to improve health behaviours of health professionals: a systematic review

04 octobre 2022

BMJ Open. 2022 Sep 26;12(9):e058955. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-058955.

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness of interventions designed to improve the health behaviours of health professionals.

DESIGN: Systematic review.

DATA SOURCES: Database searches: Medline, Cochrane library, Embase and CINAHL.

REVIEW METHODS: This systematic review used Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines to compare randomised controlled trials of health professionals, published between 2010 and 2021, which aimed to improve at least one health behaviour such as physical activity, diet, smoking status, mental health and stress. Two independent reviewers screened articles, extracted data and assessed quality of studies and reporting. The quality of articles was assessed using the Effective Public Health Practice Project quality assessment tool and the completeness of intervention reporting was assessed.

OUTCOME MEASURES: The outcome assessed was change in behaviour between intervention and control groups from baseline to follow-up.

RESULTS: Nine studies met the eligibility criteria, totalling 1107 participants. Health behaviours targeted were mental health and stress, physical activity, and smoking cessation, physical activity and nutrition. Six interventions observed significant improvements in the health behaviour in the intervention compared with control groups. Seven of the studies selected in person workshops as the mode of intervention delivery. The quality of the included studies was high with 80% (7/9) graded as moderate or strong.

CONCLUSIONS: Although high heterogeneity was found between interventions and outcomes, promising progress has occurred across a variety of health behaviours. Improving reporting and use of theories and models may improve effectiveness and evaluation of interventions. Further investigation is needed to recommend effective strategies.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42021238684.

PMID:36167392 | DOI:10.1136/bmjopen-2021-058955

Évaluation de la pratique d’évaluation d’impact sur la santé en milieu municipal au Québec

19 septembre 2022

2896.jpg

La Politique gouvernementale de prévention en santé (PGPS) et le plan d’action interministériel 2017-2021 qui l’accompagne encouragent l’expérimentation de la pratique de l’évaluation d’impact sur la santé (EIS) en contexte municipal québécois. Ils prévoient du soutien financier, de l’expertise-conseil, de la formation, des outils et du partage de connaissances. Un dispositif institutionnel d’une telle portée demeure assez rare dans les juridictions comparables. Il a été jugé opportun par les porteurs de la PGPS d’accompagner sa mise en œuvre d’une évaluation. L’évaluation se concentre sur la pertinence, la faisabilité et l’acceptabilité de onze démarches EIS, ainsi que sur les facteurs et conditions nécessaires à la réussite de cette pratique. Au total, 104 acteurs municipaux, de...

Implementation of a Health Promotion Practice Using Individually Targeted Lifestyle Interventions in Primary Health Care: Protocol for the "Act in Time" Mixed Methods Process Evaluation Study

23 août 2022

JMIR Res Protoc. 2022 Aug 19;11(8):e37634. doi: 10.2196/37634.

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: There is growing evidence that noncommunicable diseases (NCDs) can be attributable to unhealthy lifestyle habits. However, there has been little application of this knowledge in primary health care (PHC).

OBJECTIVE: This study aims to evaluate the process and outcomes of a multifaceted implementation strategy for a healthy lifestyle-promoting practice in a PHC setting. This practice is based on national guidelines targeting unhealthy lifestyle habits with a potential risk for NCDs.

METHODS: A pre-post implementation study design with a control group is used in a PHC setting in central Sweden. The Medical Research Council guidelines for process evaluation of complex interventions will be applied. The implementation process and outcomes will be assessed using a mix of qualitative and quantitative methods. A strategic sample of up to 6 PHC centers will be included as intervention centers, which will receive a 12-month multifaceted implementation strategy. Up to 6 matched PHC centers will serve as controls. Core components in the implementation strategy are external and internal facilitators in line with the integrated-Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services (i-PARIHS) framework and the Astrakan change leadership model. Data will be collected at baseline, during the implementation phase, and 4-6 months after the implementation strategy. Questionnaires will be sent to roughly 500 patients in every PHC center and 200 health care professionals (HCPs) before and after implementation. In addition, purposeful sampling will be used for interviews and focus group discussions with managers, HCPs, patient representatives, and internal and external facilitators. Use of data from medical records and activity logs will be an additional data source.

RESULTS: Recruitment of PHC centers began in March 2021 and ended in Spring 2022. Based on the planned timeline with the 12-month implementation strategy and 4-6-month follow-up, we expect to collect the final data in Summer 2023.

CONCLUSIONS: This study will explain implementation process and outcomes using a multifaceted implementation strategy for a healthy lifestyle-promoting practice in a real-world PHC context. The study is expected to provide new knowledge about the role of facilitators and their contribution to implementation outcomes. These findings can guide policy makers, managers, and PHC staff to integrate health promotion and disease prevention in PHC and provide methodological support to facilitators.

TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04799860; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04799860.

INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/37634.

PMID:35984700 | DOI:10.2196/37634

Whole-of-Government Wellbeing Approaches: A Comparative Analysis of Four Central Government Initiatives

20 juillet 2022

Context

In Canada and elsewhere, the health and economic consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic have led governments to reflect on promising avenues to support an economic recovery focused on population health and wellbeing, sustainable development, and equity, including for future generations. In this regard, wellbeing approaches are innovative initiatives for incorporating wellbeing (or quality of life) indicators into policymaking and budget allocation processes. Among other things, they aim to guide and improve the intersectoral action needed to address population health and health inequalities. These approaches are starting to take hold in Canada, as illustrated by the federal government’s adoption of the Quality of Life Strategy for Canada.

Comparative analysis of four wellbeing approaches

In order to inform decision making related to wellbeing approaches, the NCCHPP has produced a comparative analysis of four wellbeing approaches put forward by the governments of Scotland, Finland, New Zealand, and Wales. This study allowed us to identify similarities and differences between these four approaches in the following areas:

  • The wellbeing frameworks used;
  • The main objectives pursued;
  • The implementation, evaluation and accountability mechanisms;
  • The roles of various actors, including those in public health;
  • The difficulties encountered during implementation and the pathways to overcoming them.

Whole-of-Government Wellbeing Approaches: A Comparative Analysis of Four Central Government Initiatives
107 pages

Quelles évaluations des politiques publiques pour quelles utilisations ?

20 juillet 2022

Auteur : Adam Baïz, Avec la collaboration de Mathilde Guyot, Marianne Lewandowski et Achille SutyPremier volet – Qui utilise les évaluations académiquesdes politiques publiques ?Deuxième volet – Quelles évaluations sont mobilisées avant et aprèsle vote d’une loi ?L’évaluation des politiques publiques suscite un intérêt croissant auprès des institutions publiques, des sphères décisionnelles, des chercheurs et plus généralement dans la société civile . Vecteur de connaissances scientifiques et de transparence démocratique, l’évaluation des politiques publiques apparaît en effet comme un outil incontournable pour rationaliser l’action publique et pour accroître la légitimité des décisions politiques. Dans tous les domaines, qu’il s’agisse de santé, d’éducation ou de travail, il s’agit désormais de concevoir des politiques publiques éclairées par les preuves (evidence-based policies). En 2018 et en 2019, France Stratégie a publié une analyse bibliométrique et une analyse monographique de la production des évaluations de politiques publiques en France et dans certains pays avancés en la matière. Il en ressort une augmentation générale de la production de travaux évaluatifs. Cette tendance tient à des impulsions politiques plus vigoureuses, à une institutionnalisation de l’évaluation et à un renforcement des compé-tences et des standards évaluatifs au sein des institutions publiques, privées et de recherche. Il apparaît aussi, en particulier, que la France rattrape son retard en la matière, relativement aux pays précurseurs anglo-saxons (États-Unis, Canada, Royaume-Uni)...

EN SAVOIR PLUS / https://www.strategie.gouv.fr/sites/strategie.gouv.fr/files/atoms/files/fs-2022-rapport-bilan_des_epp-juin_1.pdf

Comment évoluent les méthodes d'évaluation probantes en télémédecine ?

20 juin 2022

Plus nous avançons dans l'usage des technologies numériques en santé, en particulier dans l'usage des pratiques de télémédecine et de télésoin (télésanté), plus nous avons besoin d'apporter des preuves de l'amélioration du service médical rendu (ASMR) aux usagers de la santé et/ou de l'amélioration du service attendu (ASA) par ces usagers. Les deux méthodes d’évaluation les plus connues et les plus couramment utilisées depuis 2009 sont le Modèle d’évaluation des applications de télémédecine (MAST) (1) et le cadre des normes de données probantes pour les technologies de santé numériques de l’Institut national anglais pour l’excellence de la santé et des soins (NICE) (2). Ces méthodes sont utilisées dans de nombreuses études publiées au cours des dix dernières années

EN SAVOIR PLUS / https://www.telemedaction.org/452564889


Making Conversation Analysis Accessible: A Conceptual Guide for Health Services Researchers

14 juin 2022
Qualitative Health Research, Ahead of Print.
The quality of healthcare communication can impact both experiences and outcomes. We highlight aspects of communication that can be systematically examined using Conversation Analysis (CA) and provide guidance about how researchers can incorporate CA into healthcare studies. CA is a qualitative method for studying naturally occurring communication by analyzing recurrent, systematic practices of verbal and nonverbal behavior. CA involves examining audio- or video-recorded conversations and their transcriptions to identify practices speakers use to communicate and interpret behavior. We explain what distinguishes CA from other methods that study communication and highlight three accessible CA approaches that researchers can use in their research design, analysis, or implementation of communication interventions. Specifically, these approaches focus on how talk is produced (specific words, framing, and syntax), by whom, and when it occurs in the conversation. These approaches can be leveraged to generate hypotheses and to identify patterns of behavior that inform empirically driven communication interventions.

Profils des systèmes de santé publique au Canada : Québec

14 juin 2022

2862.jpg

Alors que le Canada doit composer avec la pandémie de COVID-19, l’un des plus grands défis de santé publique de notre époque, le besoin de renforcer les systèmes de santé publique n’a jamais été aussi grand. Des systèmes de santé publique forts sont essentiels pour assurer la viabilité du système de santé, pour améliorer la santé des populations et l’équité en santé, et pour se préparer et répondre aux crises actuelles et futures. De grandes variations existent entre les provinces et les territoires en ce qui a trait aux manières dont la santé publique est organisée, gouvernée et financée, et aussi en ce qui concerne les réformes et les restructurations dont les systèmes de santé publique ont fait l’objet au cours des dernières années. Ce rapport s’appuie sur des rapports antérieurs et...

La méthodologie de projet en éducation promotion de la santé

14 juin 2022

Intérêts, étapes et modalités d’accompagnement Présentation vidéo sur notre chaine vimeo

Evaluation of Social Impact Within Primary School Health Promotion: A Systematic Review

24 mai 2022

J Sch Health. 2022 Apr 1. doi: 10.1111/josh.13160. Online ahead of print.

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Health promotion programs and interventions are designed to encourage behavioral changes in children, encouraging them to make safe and healthy life choices. This systematic review seeks to examine how social impact is measured in primary school health promotion interventions.

METHOD: A systematic search and review process was used to identify and examine primary school health promotion interventions. The PRISMA guidelines were followed to source articles from 6 electronic databases reporting school health promotion programs or interventions in Australia, Canada, New Zealand, or the United Kingdom.

RESULTS: A total of 77 studies were located, representing 55 health promotion interventions delivered in primary school settings. Of these interventions, only 8 (15%) measured or attempted to measure social impact, whereas another 8 (15%) alluded to social impact. The predominant theories reported were social based theories (theories which examine the social influences on people, environments, and behaviors) (n = 17, 59%), with almost a third not informed by an overt health promotion framework or model (n = 34, 59%). A systematic rating system identified some level of stakeholder engagement (n = 30, 53%).

CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review highlights the need for social impact measurement within health promotion to illuminate the role of school programs in delivering lasting change.

PMID:35365879 | DOI:10.1111/josh.13160