BACKGROUND: Case management (CM) is among the most studied effective models of integrated care for people with complex needs. The goal of this study is to scale up and assess CM in primary healthcare for people with complex needs.
METHODS: The research questions are: (1) which mechanisms contribute to the successful scale-up of CM for people with complex needs in primary healthcare?; (2) how do contextual factors within primary healthcare organisations contribute to these mechanisms? and (3) what are the relationships between the actors, contextual factors, mechanisms and outcomes when scaling-up CM for people with complex needs in primary healthcare? We will conduct a mixed methods Canadian interprovincial project in Quebec, New-Brunswick and Nova Scotia. It will include a scale-up phase and an evaluation phase. At inception, a scale-up committee will be formed in each province to oversee the scale-up phase. We will assess scale-up using a realist evaluation guided by the RAMESES checklist to develop an initial programme theory on CM scale-up. Then we will test and refine the programme theory using a mixed-methods multiple case study with 10 cases, each case being the scalable unit of the intervention in a region. Each primary care clinic within the case will recruit 30 adult patients with complex needs who frequently use healthcare services. Qualitative data will be used to identify contexts, mechanisms and certain outcomes for developing context-mechanism-outcome configurations. Quantitative data will be used to describe patient characteristics and measure scale-up outcomes.
BACKGROUND: Ethics approval was obtained. Engaging researchers, decision-makers, clinicians and patient partners on the study Steering Committee will foster knowledge mobilisation and impact. The dissemination plan will be developed with the Steering Committee with messages and dissemination methods targeted for each audience.

OBJECTIVE: Increasingly, healthcare and public health strategists invite us to look at healthcare organisations as not just care providers but as anchor institutions (ie, large community-rooted organisations with significant impact in the local economy, social fabric and overall community well-being). In response, this study explores the mechanisms through which healthcare organisations can impact social determinants of health and communities in their local areas.
METHODS: We conducted case studies with interviews and synthesised the findings using a realist approach to produce a set of explanations (programme theory) of how healthcare organisations can have a positive impact on the overall well-being of local communities by operating as anchor institutions.
METHODS: Secondary healthcare organisations in England, including mental health and community services.
METHODS: Staff from case study sites which were directly employed or actively engaged in the organisation\'s anchor institution strategy. Data collection took place from early June to the end of August 2023.
RESULTS: We found four building blocks for effective anchor activity including employment, spending, estates and sustainability. Healthcare organisations-as anchor institutions-can improve the social determinants of health for their local communities through enabling accessible paths for local community recruitment and career progression; empowering local businesses to join supply chains boosting income and wealth; transforming organisational spaces into community assets; and supporting local innovation and technology to achieve their sustainability goals. These blocks need to be integrated across organisations on the basis of a population health approach promoted by supportive leadership, and in collaboration with a diverse range of local partners.
CONCLUSIONS: Healthcare organisations have the potential for a positive impact on the overall well-being of local communities. Policymakers should support healthcare organisations to leverage employment, spending, estates and sustainability to help address the unequal distribution of the social determinants of health.

OBJECTIVE: The Australian government\'s \'Closing the Gap\' (CTG) strategy has been implemented via multiple strategies. We examined CTG policy in early childhood within Southern Adelaide during the first decade of implementation (2008-2018) and critiqued the complexity and challenges of policy that is designed to promote health and well-being of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children but lacked Aboriginal control.
METHODS: A qualitative case study was conducted in Southern Adelaide, and we interviewed 16 policy actors from health and early childhood education sectors. Thematic analysis revealed key themes to show how policy had been implemented through mainstream structures.
RESULTS: The rapid roll out of the CTG strategy, the limitations of short-term funding, cuts to Aboriginal health services, tokenistic consultation, and the mainstreaming of service provision were key features of policy implementation. The influence of Aboriginal leaders varied across implementation contexts. Participants advocated for services in health and education that are culturally safe to improve health of children, families, and communities.
CONCLUSIONS: The implementation of the CTG strategy in Southern Adelaide was rushed, complex, and lacking Aboriginal control. This contributed to the marginalisation of Aboriginal leaders, and disengagement of families and communities. A more collaborative and Aboriginal led process for policy implementation is essential to reform policy implementation and address health inequity. SO WHAT?: Findings from this study suggest that policy has continued to be implemented I ways that reflect colonial power imbalances. Alternative processes that promote the recognition of Indigenous rights must be considered if we are to achieve the targets set within the CTG strategy.

BACKGROUND: Social needs such as housing, employment, food, income and social isolation are having a significant impact on individuals, families and communities. Individuals are increasingly presenting to health settings with social needs, which are ill-equipped to address nonmedical needs. Social prescribing is a systematic approach connecting the health, social and community sectors to better address social needs and improve health and wellbeing. Social prescribing interventions are being implemented world-wide. With variability in health and social care systems internationally, it is important that social prescribing interventions are co-designed with key stakeholders to ensure they can be implemented and sustained within local systems.
METHODS: This Australian case study provides a detailed description of the process undertaken to co-design a social prescribing service model in a regional area. Four co-design workshops were undertaken, two with health and social care professionals and two with community members. The project followed an iterative process of resourcing, planning, recruiting, sensitising, facilitation, reflection and building for change across the workshops.
RESULTS: Through this process, key stakeholders were able to successfully co-design a social prescribing model of care for the region.
CONCLUSIONS: By demonstrating the process and materials used in our project, we aim to open the \'black box\' of co-design for social prescribing and provide ideas and resources for others to adapt and utilise.
UNASSIGNED: The project was designed and undertaken by a steering committee comprising university-based researchers (authors C. O. and S. B.), local government (author D. A.) and health, social and community services (authors B. G., M. W., J. O. and S. R.). Members of the steering committee participated in project design, participant recruitment, workshop facilitation, data analysis and interpretation.

UNASSIGNED: The mental health of children/young people is a growing concern internationally. Numerous reports and reviews have consistently described United Kingdom children\'s mental health services as fragmented, variable, inaccessible and lacking an evidence base. Little is known about the effectiveness of, and implementation complexities associated with, service models for children/young people experiencing \'common\' mental health problems like anxiety, depression, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder and self-harm.
UNASSIGNED: To develop a model for high-quality service design for children/young people experiencing common mental health problems by identifying available services, barriers and enablers to access, and the effectiveness, cost effectiveness and acceptability of such services.
UNASSIGNED: Evidence syntheses with primary research, using a sequential, mixed-methods design. Inter-related scoping and integrative reviews were conducted alongside a map of relevant services across England and Wales, followed by a collective case study of English and Welsh services.
UNASSIGNED: Global (systematic reviews); England and Wales (service map; case study).
UNASSIGNED: Literature reviews: relevant bibliographic databases and grey literature. Service map: online survey and offline desk research. Case study: 108 participants (41 children/young people, 26 parents, 41 staff) across nine case study sites.
UNASSIGNED: A single literature search informed both reviews. The service map was obtained from an online survey and internet searches. Case study sites were sampled from the service map; because of coronavirus disease 2019, case study data were collected remotely. \'Young co-researchers\' assisted with case study data collection. The integrative review and case study data were synthesised using the \'weaving\' approach of \'integration through narrative\'.
UNASSIGNED: A service model typology was derived from the scoping review. The integrative review found effectiveness evidence for collaborative care, outreach approaches, brief intervention services and the \'availability, responsiveness and continuity\' framework. There was cost-effectiveness evidence only for collaborative care. No service model appeared to be more acceptable than others. The service map identified 154 English and Welsh services. Three themes emerged from the case study data: \'pathways to support\'; \'service engagement\'; and \'learning and understanding\'. The integrative review and case study data were synthesised into a coproduced model of high-quality service provision for children/young people experiencing common mental health problems.
UNASSIGNED: Defining \'service model\' was a challenge. Some service initiatives were too new to have filtered through into the literature or service map. Coronavirus disease 2019 brought about a surge in remote/digital services which were under-represented in the literature. A dearth of relevant studies meant few cost-effectiveness conclusions could be drawn.
UNASSIGNED: There was no strong evidence to suggest any existing service model was better than another. Instead, we developed a coproduced, evidence-based model that incorporates the fundamental components necessary for high-quality children\'s mental health services and which has utility for policy, practice and research.
UNASSIGNED: Future work should focus on: the potential of our model to assist in designing, delivering and auditing children\'s mental health services; reasons for non-engagement in services; the cost effectiveness of different approaches in children\'s mental health; the advantages/disadvantages of digital/remote platforms in delivering services; understanding how and what the statutory sector might learn from the non-statutory sector regarding choice, personalisation and flexibility.
UNASSIGNED: This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42018106219.
UNASSIGNED: This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health and Social Care Delivery Research programme (NIHR award ref: 17/09/08) and is published in full in Health and Social Care Delivery Research; Vol. 12, No. 13. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.
In this research study, we explored services for children and young people with ‘common’ mental health problems like depression, anxiety and self-harm. We aimed to find out what services exist, how children/young people and families find out about and access these services, what the services actually do, whether they are helpful and whether they offer value for money. We looked at the international literature (reports and research papers) to identify different approaches to providing support, and to find out whether certain approaches worked better than others and whether children/young people and families preferred some approaches over others. The literature provided very little information about the value for money of services. We also carried out a survey and used the internet to identify 154 relevant services in England and Wales. To explore services in more detail, and hear directly from those using them, we planned to visit 9 of the 154 services to interview children/young people, parents and staff. Unfortunately, coronavirus disease 2019 stopped us directly visiting the nine services and so we conducted phone and video interviews instead. We still managed to speak to, and hear the experiences of, more than 100 people (including children/young people and parents). We combined information from the literature with information from the interviews to create an evidence-based ‘model’ of what services should look like. This model considers some basic things like how quickly children/young people could access a service, what information was available, the importance of confidentiality and whether staff make the service fit with the child/young person’s needs and interests. It also considers whether the service helps children/young people learn skills to manage their mental health and whether staff at a service work well together. We hope our model will help existing and new services improve what they offer to children/young people and families.

BACKGROUND: With increased attention to the importance of integrating the One Health approach into zoonotic disease surveillance and response, a greater understanding of the mechanisms to support effective communication and information sharing across animal and human health sectors is needed. The objectives of this qualitative case study were to describe the communication channels used between human and animal health stakeholders and to identify the elements that have enabled the integration of the One Health approach.
METHODS: We combined documentary research with interviews with fifteen stakeholders to map the communication channels used in human and swine influenza surveillance in Alberta, Canada, as well as in the response to a human case of H1N2v in 2020. A thematic analysis of the interviews was also used to identify the barriers and facilitators to communication among stakeholders from the animal and human health sectors.
RESULTS: When a human case of swine influenza emerged, the response led by the provincial Chief Medical Officer of Health involved players at various levels of government and in the human and animal health sectors. The collaboration of public and animal health laboratories and of the swine sector, in addition to the information available through the surveillance systems in place, was swift and effective. Elements identified as enabling smooth communication between the human and animal health systems included preexisting relationships between the various stakeholders, a relationship of trust between them (e.g., the swine sector and their perception of government structures), the presence of stakeholders acting as permanent liaisons between the ministries of health and agriculture, and stakeholders\' understanding of the importance of the One Health approach.
CONCLUSIONS: Information flows through formal and informal channels and both structural and relational features that can support rapid and effective communication in infectious disease surveillance and outbreak response.

BACKGROUND: Using health facility types as a measure of service availability is a common approach in international standards for health system policy and planning. However, this proxy may not accurately reflect the actual availability of specific health services.
OBJECTIVE: This study aims to evaluate the reliability of health facility typology as an indicator of specific health service availability and explore whether certain facility types consistently provide particular services.
METHODS: We analysed a comprehensive dataset containing information from 1725 health facilities in Mali. To uncover and visualise patterns within the dataset, we used two analytical techniques: Multiple Correspondence Analysis and Between-Class Analysis. These analyses allowed us to quantitatively measure the influence of health facility types on the variation in health service provisioning. Additionally, we developed and calculated a Consistency Index, which assesses the consistency of a health facility type in providing specific health services. By examining various health facilities and services, we sought to determine the accuracy of facility types as indicators of service availability.
METHODS: The study focused on the health system in Mali as a case study.
RESULTS: Our findings indicate that using health facility types as a proxy for service availability in Mali is not an accurate representation. We observed that most of the variation in service provision does not stem from differences between facility types but rather within facility types. This suggests that relying solely on health facility typology may lead to an incomplete understanding of health service availability.
CONCLUSIONS: These results have significant implications for health policy and planning. The reliance on health facility types as indicators for health system policy and planning should be reconsidered. A more nuanced and evidence-based understanding of health service availability is crucial for effective health policy and planning, as well as for the assessment and monitoring of health systems.

Health systems are complex entities. The Mexican health system includes the private and public sectors, and subsystems that target different populations based on corporatist criteria. Lack of unity and its consequences can be better understood using two concepts, segmentation and fragmentation. These reveal mechanisms and strategies that impede progress toward universality and equity in Mexico and other low- and middle-income countries. Segmentation refers to separation of the population by position in the labour market. Fragmentation refers to institutions, and to financial aspects, health care levels, states\' systems of care, and organizational models. These elements explain inequitable allocation of resources and packages of health services offered by each institution to its population. Overcoming segmentation will require a shift from employment to citizenship as the basis for eligibility for public health care. Shortcomings of fragmentation can be avoided by establishing a common package of guaranteed benefits. Mexico illustrates how these two concepts characterize a common reality in low- and middle-income countries.

Low-and middle-income countries (LMICs) are implementing health financing reforms toward Universal Health Coverage (UHC). In Tanzania direct health facility financing of health basket funds (DHFF-HBF) scheme was introduced in 2017/18, while the results-based financing (RBF) scheme was introduced in 2016. The DHFF-HBF involves a direct transfer of pooled donor funds (Health Basket Funds, HBF) from the central government to public primary healthcare-PHC (including a few selected non-public PHC with a service agreement) facilities bank accounts, while the RBF involves paying providers based on pre-defined performance indicators or targets in PHC facilities. We consider whether these two reforms align with strategic healthcare purchasing principles by describing and comparing their purchasing arrangements and associated financial autonomy.
We used document review and qualitative methods. Key policy documents and articles related to strategic purchasing and financial autonomy were reviewed. In-depth interviews were conducted with health managers and providers (n = 31) from 25 public facilities, health managers (n = 4) in the Mwanza region (implementing DHFF-HBF and RBF), and national-level stakeholders (n = 2). In this paper, we describe and compare DHFF-HBF and RBF in terms of four functions of strategic purchasing (benefit specification, contracting, payment method, and performance monitoring), but also compare the degree of purchaser-provider split and financial autonomy. Interviews were recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed using a thematic framework approach.
The RBF paid facilities based on 17 health services and 18 groups of quality indicators, whilst the DHFF-HBF payment accounts for performance on two quality indicators, six service indicators, distance from district headquarters, and population catchment size. Both schemes purchased services from PHC facilities (dispensaries, health centers, and district hospitals). RBF uses a fee-for-service payment adjusted by the quality of care score method adjusted by quality of care score, while the DHFF-HBF scheme uses a formula-based capitation payment method with adjustors. Unlike DHFF-HBF which relies on an annual general auditing process, the RBF involved more detailed and intensive performance monitoring including data before verification prior to payment across all facilities on a quarterly basis. RBF scheme had a clear purchaser-provider split arrangement compared to a partial arrangement under the DHFF-HBF scheme. Study participants reported that the RBF scheme provided more autonomy on spending facility funds, while the DHFF-HBF scheme was less flexible due to a budget ceiling on specific spending items.
Both RBF and DHFF-HBF considered most of the strategic healthcare purchasing principles, but further efforts are needed to strengthen the alignment towards UHC. This may include further strengthening the data verification process and spending autonomy for DHFF-HBF, although it is important to contain costs associated with verification and ensuring public financial management around spending autonomy.

The WHO neglected tropical disease (NTD) roadmap stresses the importance of integrating NTDs requiring case management (CM) within the health system. The NTDs programme of Liberia is among the first to implement an integrated approach and evaluate its impact.
A retrospective study of three of five CM-NTD-endemic counties that implemented the integrated approach was compared with cluster-matched counties with non-integrated CM-NTD. We compared trends in CM-NTD integrated versus non-integrated county clusters. We conducted a pre-post comparison of WHO high-level outcomes using data collected during intervention years compared with baseline in control counties. Changes in health outcomes, effect sizes for different diseases and rate ratios with statistically significant differences were determined. Complementary qualitative research explored CM-NTD stakeholders\' perceptions, analysed through the framework approach, which is a transparent, multistage approach for qualitative thematic interdisciplinary data analysis.
The detection rates for all diseases combined improved significantly in the intervention compared with the control clusters. Besides leprosy, detection rates improved with large effects, over fourfold increase with statistically significant effects for individual diseases (p<0.000; 95% CI 3.5 to 5.4). Access to CM-NTD services increased in integrated counties by 71 facilities, compared with three facilities in non-integrated counties. Qualitative findings highlight training and supervision as inputs underpinning increases in case detection, but challenges with refresher training, medicine supply and incentives negatively impact quality, equity and access.
Integrating CM-NTDs improves case detection, accessibility and availability of CM-NTD services, promoting universal health coverage. Early case detection and the quality of care need further strengthening.