RESUMO

To develop and pilot-test a feasible and meaningful evaluation framework to support the ongoing improvement and performance measurement of services and systems in Latin America regarding Collaborative Mental health Care (CMHC). This mixed methods study, guided by a developmental evaluation approach, included: (1) a critical review of the literature; (2) an environmental scan at three selected health networks in Mexico, Nicaragua and Chile; (3) a Delphi group with experts; (4) a final consultation in the three sites; and (5) a pilot-test of the framework. A comprehensive evaluation framework was developed and successfully piloted. It considers five levels, 28 dimensions and 40 domains, as well as examples of indicators and an implementation plan. This evaluation framework represents an important effort to foster accountability and quality regarding CMHC in Latin America. Recommendations to build upon current capacity and to effectively address the existing implementation challenges are further discussed.

Assuntos

RESUMO

OBJECTIVES: Approaches to collaborative mental health care (CMHC) have been implemented in many countries to strengthen the accessibility and delivery of mental health services in primary care. However, there are not well-defined frameworks to evaluate CMHC models. The purpose of this article is to identify, contextualize and discuss relevant health services research approaches, theory, and evaluation models for the development of an appropriate evaluation framework in order to foster effective CMHC in Latin America. METHODS: A comprehensive literature review informed a critical analysis of relevant theories and alternative methods to be considered in the development of the framework. RESULTS: Specific health services research frameworks are discussed in the context of evaluating CMHC. Two theoretical perspectives - collaboration theory and systems theory - and three evaluation models- realistic, developmental and collaborative - are analyzed in terms of their relevance. Methodological implications are identified. CONCLUSION: An appropriate evaluation framework for CMHC in Latin America needs to reflect theoretical and contextual considerations and relevant evaluation approaches and methods, including key dimensions and attributes/variables, core indicators, and recommendations for implementation.

Assuntos

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: The progressive multimorbidity explosion has challenged Chile's health systems and worldwide. The Centro de Innovación en Salud ANCORA UC implemented a new Multimorbidity Patient-Centered Care Model in Chile. OBJECTIVE: Evaluate the perspective of high-risk patients about the core elements of the model. METHODOLOGY: We conducted a cross sectional telephone-based survey that considered the application of a 13 items questionnaire. Of them, nine were Likert scale questions with scores from 1 to 7, one dichotomic question, and three open-ended questions. 231 high-risk patients who received care through the model at primary care centers participated in the study. Quantitative data were encoded, consolidated, and analyzed with the SPSS software. We performed descriptive and analytic statistics techniques to assess different variables and their potential associations. Thematic analysis was conducted for qualitative data. RESULTS: The overall score was 5.84 (range: 1 to 7), with a standard deviation of 1.25. Questions with the best scores were those related with personalized care and the primary care teams. The lowest scored was for the item regarding the continuity of care between primary nurses and inpatient care at the hospital. There was a difference in patient outcomes depending on their health center. Regarding sociodemographic characteristics, age did not significantly affect the results. CONCLUSIONS: The study reveals the perceptions about a complex multimorbidity intervention from the patient's perspective. It complements the impact on health services utilization evaluation that supports decision-makers currently scaling up a similar strategy in our country and could be considered in other countries dealing with non-communicable diseases.

Assuntos

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Complex health interventions involve deep organizational, structural, and cultural changes that challenge health teams and decision-makers. The explosion of chronic diseases has made the multimorbidity approach a global priority. The Centro de Innovación en Salud ANCORA UC implemented a Multimorbidity Patient-Centered Care Model in the Chilean public health system. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to evaluate the progress of the implementation of the Multimorbidity Patient-Centered Care Model in seven primary care centers through key performance indicators. METHODS: a set of indicators was designed to evaluate change management, operations, installation of new roles, and services and activities of the intervention strategy of the model. Key performance indicators were identified to monitor the implementation progress on minimal components for the model's sustainability. Each item was assigned against an expected minimum score of 67% of progress from the overall score. They were monitored twice in seven primary health centers in 2019 and 2020, which intervened 22,642 patients with the intervention. RESULTS: The results showed that six of the seven primary care centers reached the minimum implementation threshold. The main advances were in operational conditions, and those with minor progress in implementation were the clinical services. Population size, organization, coordination of the health care teams, additional training, and decision-makers support were key factors that determined the degree of progress in a complex intervention. CONCLUSION: It was possible to measure the progression of the implementation of a complex intervention through key performance indicators delivering relevant information for decision-makers that pursue a successful and faithful implementation. This study provides a valuable tool for the national scale-up of a similar model started in Chile by the Ministry of Health and other countries.

Assuntos

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Primary care providers (PCPs) are relevant stakeholders for primary care research (PCR). OBJECTIVE: We report the perceived importance and interest in PCR of a national sample of Chilean PCPs. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional study targeting Chilean PCPs. An electronic survey assessing perceived relevance of PCR, research training and experience, training interests, and demographics was disseminated through emails and WhatsApp messages. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize data. Logistic regression models were used to estimate adjusted probabilities and 95% confidence intervals for high interest in PCR, high interest in using research methods, and high interest in receiving research training, and predictors of these outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 387 providers completed the online survey. Only 26.4% of PCPs had research experience as a principal or co-investigator. However, most clinicians perceived PCR as very important (92.5%) and were interested in using research methods (90.7%) and receiving training (94.3%). There were no statistically significant differences in these perceptions between provider's discipline, role, sex, age, and geographical location after adjusting for covariates. CONCLUSIONS: Despite few Chilean PCPs have research training, a large majority perceive it as important, are interested in using it in their practice and would like to receive training.

RESUMO

Stigma toward people with mental illness and substance use problems is a significant global concern, and prevents people with these conditions from accessing treatment, particularly in primary health care (PHC) settings. Stigma is a cultural phenomenon that is influenced by particular contexts and can differ by country and region. The majority of stigma research focuses on Europe or North America leading to a lack of culturally relevant stigma research instruments for the Latin American context. The present study describes and discusses the methodology for cross-culturally adapting four stigma measurement scales to the Chilean context. The cross-cultural adaptation process included nine phases: (1) preparation; (2) independent translations; (3) synthesis 1 with expert committee; (4) focus groups and interviews with researchers, PHC professionals, and PHC users; (5) synthesis 2 with expert committee; (6) independent back translations; (7) synthesis 3 with expert committee; (8) pilot with PHC professionals; and (9) final revisions. The adaptation process included an array of diverse voices from the PHC context, and met three adaptation objectives defined prior to beginning the process (Understandability, Relevance, and Acceptability and Answer Options). The resulting, culturally adapted questionnaire is being validated and implemented within PHC settings across Chile to provide in-depth insight into stigma among PHC professionals in the country. The authors hope it will be useful for future research on mental illness and substance use stigma in similar settings across Latin America.

Assuntos

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: The Multimorbidity Person-Centered Care Model allows to customize care according the needs of each person. AIM: To characterize the perception of health teams about the contribution of the Multimorbidity Person-Centered Care Model (MACEP) to the development of the key principles of the Comprehensive Family and Community Health Care Model (MAIS). MATERIAL AND METHODS: A qualitative collaborative study with 35 interviews and the participation of 67 professionals from the primary healthcare network. Content analysis using mixed code system with MAXQDA2020 program. RESULTS: The innovations and complex interventions that positively affect the development and implementation of the essential principles of MAIS were recognized by participants as a contribution of the central elements of MACEP. CONCLUSIONS: This contribution is an opportunity for the expeditious implementation of Family Health principles in the health network. Incorporating the vision of implementers and users, who are part of these changes, is essential. It is necessary to establish, project and evaluate innovations to identify, implement and promote learning at Health Services throughout the country.

Assuntos

RESUMO

The COVID-19 pandemic has abruptly changed care priority and delivery, delaying others like the multimorbidity approach. The Centro de Innovación en Salud ANCORA UC, the Health National Fund, and the Servicio de Salud Metropolitano Sur Oriente implemented a Multimorbidity Patient-Centered Care Model as a pilot study in the public health network from 2017 to 2020. Its objective was to reorganize the single diagnosis standard care into a new one based on multimorbidity integrated care. It included incorporating new roles, services, and activities according to each patient's risk stratification. This study aims to describe the perception of the health care teams regarding the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on four main topics: how the COVID-19 pandemic affected the MCPM implementation, how participants adapted it, lessons learned, and recommendations for sustainability. We conducted a qualitative study with 35 semi-structured interviews between October and December 2020. Data analysis was codified, triangulated, and consolidated using MAXQDA 2020. Results showed that the pandemic paused the total of the implementation practically. Positive effects were the improvement of remote health care services, the activation of self-management, and the cohesion of the teamwork. In contrast, frequent abrupt changes and reorganization forced by pandemic evolution were negative effects. This study revealed the magnitude of the pandemic in the cancelation of health services and identified the urgent need to restart chronic services incorporating patient-centered care in our system.

Assuntos

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: The Multimorbidity Person-Centered Care Model allows to customize care according the needs of each person. AIM: To characterize the perception of health teams about the contribution of the Multimorbidity Person-Centered Care Model (MACEP) to the development of the key principles of the Comprehensive Family and Community Health Care Model (MAIS). MATERIAL AND METHODS: A qualitative collaborative study with 35 interviews and the participation of 67 professionals from the primary healthcare network. Content analysis using mixed code system with MAXQDA2020 program. RESULTS: The innovations and complex interventions that positively affect the development and implementation of the essential principles of MAIS were recognized by participants as a contribution of the central elements of MACEP. CONCLUSIONS: This contribution is an opportunity for the expeditious implementation of Family Health principles in the health network. Incorporating the vision of implementers and users, who are part of these changes, is essential. It is necessary to establish, project and evaluate innovations to identify, implement and promote learning at Health Services throughout the country.

Assuntos