Health policy and planning
-
The availability of evidence-based guidelines does not ensure their implementation and use in clinical practice or policy making. Inequities in health have been defined as those inequalities within or between populations that are avoidable, unnecessary and also unjust and unfair. Evidence-based clinical practice and public health guidelines ('guidelines') can be used to target health inequities experienced by disadvantaged populations, although guidelines may unintentionally increase health inequities. ⋯ A critical appraisal of the literature followed by a process to build expert consensus was undertaken to define how to include consideration of equity issues during the specific GRADE guideline development process. Using a case study from Colombia we describe nine steps that were used to implement equity-focused GRADE recommendations: (1) identification of disadvantaged groups, (2) quantification of current health inequities, (3) development of equity-sensitive recommendations, (4) identification of key actors for implementation of equity-focused recommendations, (5) identification of barriers and facilitators to the implementation of equity-focused recommendations, (6) development of an equity strategy to be included in the implementation plan, (7) assessment of resources and incentives, (8) development of a communication strategy to support an equity focus and (9) development of monitoring and evaluation strategies. This case study can be used as model for implementing clinical practice guidelines, taking into account equity issues during guideline development and implementation.
-
Incorporating evidence is fundamental to maintaining the general acceptance and efficiency in public policies. In Pakistan, different actors-local and global-strive to facilitate the development of evidence-informed health policies. Effective involvement however, requires knowledge of the country-context, i.e. knowing the intricacies of how policies are formulated in Pakistan. ⋯ Since the devolution of health system in 2012, Pakistan's provinces continue to follow the same processes as before 2012, with little capacity to generate evidence and incorporate it into health policy. This study highlights the non-systematic, nearly ad hoc way of developing health policy in the country, overly dominated by political actors. Health advocates need to understand the policy process and the actors involved if they are to identify points of impact where their interaction with policy brings the maximum leverage. Moreover, an environment is needed where generation of data gains the importance it deserves and where capacities are enhanced for communicating and understanding evidence, as well as its incorporation into policy.