Search

Abstract Background Hypertension and diabetes are on the rise both in Rwanda and South Africa. The responsibility for NCD risk factors cut across different sectors, which makes it complex to effectively manage. Policy-relevant intervention research is thus critical for addressing the NCD challenge. We conducted a situational analysis in both countries to identify and describe current population-level interventions targeting risk factors for diabetes and hypertension. This paper presents this methodology and shares challenges encountered, and lessons learnt in applying the methodology. Methods We describe a multi-component methodology for conducting a situational analysis, which included a desk review, stakeholder mapping, survey, key informant interviews, and a consultative workshop. This methodology was applied in a standardized manner in two African countries. Following the analysis, the authors held iterative team consultations to reflect on challenges and lessons learnt during this process. Results Key challenges and lessons learnt relate to i) stakeholder recruitment, engagement and retainment; ii) utilization and triangulation of multiple sources of data; and iii) evolving circumstances, particularly related to the Covid-19 pandemic. It proved challenging to recruit stakeholders outside the health sector and in the private sector, as they often do not consider themselves as making or influencing policies and thus were reluctant to engage. The difficulties with responsiveness were often overcome through face-to-face visits, an opportunity to explain the relevance of their participation. With regards to health sector stakeholders and all other stakeholders, continued engagement over prolonged periods of time also turned out to be challenging. Covid-19 restrictions were preserved to be an impediment throughout the conduct of the situational analysis, specifically in South Africa. The use of multi-stage mixed methods was found to be appropriate for addressing the study objectives, as each step yielded unique data, concepts, and perspectives that complemented the other data. Conclusion Conducting a situational analysis is crucial for understanding the current state of interventions and identifying opportunities for new interventions. The multi-component methodology used in two African countries was found to be feasible, appropriate, and informative. Others planning to conduct situational analysis may follow, adapt and improve upon our approach, reacting to the challenges encountered.

Sub-Saharan Africa carries a high burden of the HIV epidemic, with young adults being particularly affected. Well-designed school-based HIV prevention interventions can contribute to establishing protective behaviour. The aim of this study was to explore the needs of primary school students and teachers in the region of Kagera, Tanzania, regarding an HIV prevention intervention in the primary school setting. The needs assessment was structured according to the PRECEDE component of the PRECEDE-PROCEED model. Qualitative data was collected in six focus group discussions with primary school students and teachers. Key informant interviews with seven experts were conducted. We employed qualitative content analysis to analyse data in MAXQDA. The findings suggest that teachers need to be adequately trained to provide HIV and sex education and to support HIV-positive students. Enabling structural factors, such as an appropriate syllabus, are required. Stigmatization has been reported a major barrier to HIV prevention in schools. Teachers and students identified a more trustful relationship between each other as well as to legal guardians of children as a basis for HIV prevention. These findings will inform the development of a tailored HIV prevention intervention.

We describe a combination of methods for assessing the effectiveness of complex interventions, especially where substantial heterogeneity with regard to the population, intervention, comparison, outcomes, and study design of interest is expected. We applied these methods in a recent systematic review of the effectiveness of reinforced home-based palliative care (rHBPC) interventions, which included home-based care with an additional and explicit component of lay caregiver support. We first summarized the identified evidence, deemed inappropriate for statistical pooling, graphically by creating harvest plots. Although very useful as a tool for summary and presentation of overall effectiveness, such graphical summary approaches may obscure relevant differences between studies. Thus, we then used a gap analysis and conducted expert consultations to look beyond the aggregate level at how the identified evidence of effectiveness may be explained. The goal of these supplemental methods was to step outside of the conventional systematic review and explore this heterogeneity from a broader perspective, based on the experience of palliative care researchers and practitioners. The gap analysis and expert consultations provided valuable input into possible underlying explanations in the evidence, which could be helpful in the further adaptation and testing of existing rHBPC interventions or the development and evaluation of new ones. We feel that such a combination of methods could prove accessible, understandable, and useful in informing decisions and could thus help increase the relevance of systematic reviews to the decision-making process.