By using the PLATFORM FOR KNOWLEDGE EXCHANGE website of the JA-CHRODIS you agree our use of cookies as described in our cookie policy.

In this section you can find tools and resources to guide you through the different approach and models for the design of a practice (i.e. policy, program, project, intervention).

 

CHRONIC CARE MODEL (CCM)

Description
A model created by the MacColl Institute for Healthcare Innovation (USA) that integrates the basic elements for improving care in health systems at the community, organisation, practice and patient levels. The Chronic Care Model (CCM) identifies the essential elements of a health care system that encourage high-quality chronic disease care.
The elements identified are the community, the health system, self-management support, delivery system design, decision support and clinical information systems. Evidence-based change concepts under each element, in combination, foster productive interactions between informed patients who take an active part in their care and providers with resources and expertise.
For more information, visit:
Chronic Care Model (CCM)

 

SUPPORT TOOLS FOR EVIDENCE-INFORMED HEALTH POLICYMAKING

Description
Series written to help policy maker to ensure that their decisions are well-informed by the best available research evidence. The series describes a set of tools that have been developed by the SUPporting POlicy relevant Reviews and Trials (SUPPORT) project, an international collaboration funded by the European Commission’s 6th Framework. It describes the SUPPORT tools and the ways in which they can be used.  Developed by Lavis JN, Oxman AD, Lewin S, Fretheim A. SUPPORT Tools for evidence-informed health Policymaking (STP).
In each article in this series, it is proposed a tool that can be used by those involved in finding and using research evidence to support evidence-informed health policymaking. The series addresses four broad areas of interest related to policymaking: supporting evidence-informed policymaking, identifying needs for research evidence in relation to three steps in policymaking processes, namely clarifying problems, framing options and planning implementation, Finding and assessing evidence to inform each of these steps focus on systematic reviews and Articles on other types of evidence, and going from research evidence to decisions focus on engaging stakeholders in evidence-informed policymaking.
For more information, visit:
SUPPORT Tools for Evidence-Informed Health Policy Making 
References: John N Lavis, Andrew D Oxman, Simon Lewin and Atle Fretheim. Health Research Policy and Systems, 2009 (Suppl 1):I1
Series
1. Supporting evidence-informed policymaking:
SUPPORT article S1
SUPPORT ARTICLE S2
SUPPORT ARTICLE S3
2. Identifying needs for research evidence in relation to three steps in policymaking processes, namely clarifying problems, framing options and planning implementation
SUPPORT (IDENTIFYING EVIDENCE GAPS IN POLICYMAKING PROCESSES) S4
SUPPORT (IDENTIFYING EVIDENCE GAPS IN POLICYMAKING PROCESSES) S5
SUPPORT (IDENTIFYING EVIDENCE GAPS IN POLICYMAKING PROCESSES) S6

3. Finding and assessing evidence to inform each of these steps focus on systematic reviews and articles on other types of evidence:
SUPPORT (Assessing evidence to inform policymaking) S7
Support (Assessing evidence to inform policymaking) S8
Support (Assessing evidence to inform policymaking) S9
Support (Assessing evidence to inform policymaking) S10
Support (Assessing evidence to inform policymaking) S11
Support (Assessing evidence to inform policymaking) S12
4. Going from research evidence to decisions focus on engaging stakeholders in evidence-informed policymaking.
Support (Engaging stakeholders in policymaking) S13
support (engaging stakeholders in policymaking) S14
Support (engaging stakeholders in policymaking) S15
5. Address how to use research evidence in decisions.
Support (Evidence to Decisions) S16
Support (evidence to decisions) S17
support (evidence to decisions) s18  

 

HIGHLY ADOPTABLE IMPROVEMENT MODEL

Description
This website introduces the Highly Adoptable Improvement Model and provides tools and supports to assess and create more sustainably adoptable improvement initiatives. The purpose of the toolkit is for quality improvement teams (and those commissioning the teams) to use the Highly Adoptable Improvement model to reflect on, discuss and assess how the design of the intervention and the implementation strategy are likely to impact workload and perceived value.
The assessment guide provides a set of questions, centered on key domains, to guide discussion and help your organization and team identify opportunities for improvement in the implementation strategy and intervention design that will enhance more sustainable adoption. The tool is not intended to evaluate performance, compare or place judgment but rather to drive conversation around creating more adoptable strategies. It suggests different actions and tools to help teams to create more Highly Adoptable Improvement initiatives (guides on how to carry out the assessment, vignette that illustrates two approaches to implementing new processes in care delivery and worksheet)
For more information, visit:
HIGHLY ADOPTABLE IMPROVEMENT MODEL                                                     
HIGHLY ADOPTABLE ASSESSMENT GUIDE
HIGHLY ADOPTABLE ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET (WORD) 
HIGHLY ADOPTABLE SUGGESTED ACTIONS AND TOOLS
HIGHLY ADOPTABLE CLINICAL VIGNETTE

 

INTEGRATED COMMUNITY CASE MANAGEMENT FRAMEWORK (ICCM). BENCHMARKS AND INDICATORS CHART

Description
A tool for program planners and managers to systematically design and implement iCCM programs from the early phases through to expansion and scale-up. Key activities or steps that should be completed are specified for each component and for each phase of implementation. Paper published by McGorman  L., et al. “A Health Systems Approach to Integrated Community Case Management of Childhood Illness: Methods and Tools.” American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene 87.5 (2012): 69-76
The intent is that benchmarks in one phase should be addressed before progressing to the next phase, although it is recognized that such a linear progression is not always possible. By spanning components ranging from coordination and policy setting to human resources and supervision and quality assurance and covering introduction to expansion, the iCCM benchmarks help planners and implementers chart their way towards implementing a comprehensive iCCM program at scale.
The proposed benchmarks are being grouped into the three phases of program evolution: Advocacy & Planning, Pilot & Early Implementation and Expansion & Scale-up wherein eight health systems components are being identified:
1. Coordination and Policy Setting
2. Costing and Financing
3. Human Resources
4. Supply Chain Management
5. Service Delivery and Referral
6. Communication and Social Mobilization
7. Supervision and Performance Quality Assurance
8. Monitoring & Evaluation, and Health Information Systems
For more information, visit:
Integrated Community Case Management Framework (ICCM)