The Need for a Dynamic Approach to Health System-Centered Innovations; Comment on “What Health System Challenges Should Responsible Innovation in Health Address? Insights From an International Scoping Review”

Document Type: Commentary

Authors

1 Department of Public Health, Institute of Tropical Medicine, Antwerp, Belgium

2 Department of Primary and Interdisciplinary Care, University of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium

Abstract

Lehoux and colleagues plea for a health systems perspective to evaluate innovations. Since many innovations and their scale-up strategies emerge from processes that are not (centrally) steered, we plea for any assessment with a dynamic, instead of a sequential, approach. We provide further guidance on how to adopt such dynamic approach, in order to better un-derstand and steer innovations for better health systems. A systems-level challenge is constituted by interactions and feedback loops between different actors and components of the health system. It is therefore essential to explore both the entry-point of innovation and the interactions with other components. If innovation is regarded as an injection of resources and opportunities into a health system, this system needs to have the capacity to transform these into desired outputs, the ‘absorption capacity.’ The highly organic diffusion of innovation in complex adapative systems cannot be easily controlled, but the system behaviours can be analysed, with occurance of phenomena such as path dependence, feedback loops, scale-free networks, emergent behaviour and phase transitions. This helps to anticipate unintended consequences, and to engage key actors in ongoing problem-solving and adaptation. By adopting a prospective approach, responsible innovation could set in motion prospective policy evaluations, which on the basis of iterative learning would allow decisionmakers to continuously adapt their policies and programmes. Priority-setting for innovation is an essentially political process that is geared towards consensus-building and grounded in values.

Keywords

Main Subjects


  1. Donabedian A. Evaluating the quality of medical care. 1966. Milbank Q. 2005;83(4):691-729. doi:10.1111/j.1468-0009.2005.00397.x
  2. van Olmen J, Criel B, Bhojani U, et al. The health system dynamics framework: the introduction of an analytical model for health system analysis and its application to two case-studies. Health Cult Soc. 2012;2(1):1-21. doi:10.5195/hcs.2012.71
  3. Lehoux P, Roncarolo F, Silva HP, Boivin A, Denis J-L, Hebert R. What health system challenges should responsible innovation in health address? Insights from an international scoping review. Int J Health Policy Manag. 2019;8(2):63-75. doi:10.15171/ijhpm.2018.110
  4. Greenhalgh T, Robert G, Macfarlane F, Bate P, Kyriakidou O. Diffusion of innovations in service organizations: systematic review and recommendations. Milbank Q. 2004;82(4):581-629. doi:10.1111/j.0887-378X.2004.00325.x
  5. de Savigny D, Blanchet K, Adam T. Applied systems thinking for health systems research: a methodological handbook. Open University Press; 2017.
  6. van Olmen J, Criel B, Van Damme W, et al. Analysing health system dynamics. (Studies in Health Services Organization & Policy). Report No.: 28. Antwerp: ITGPress; 2012.
  7. Atun R, de Jongh T, Secci F, Ohiri K, Adeyi O. A systematic review of the evidence on integration of targeted health interventions into health systems. Health Policy Plan. 2010;25(1):1-14. doi:10.1093/heapol/czp053
  8. Potter C, Brough R. Systemic capacity building: a hierarchy of needs. Health Policy Plan. 2004;19(5):336-345.
  9. Paina L, Peters DH. Understanding pathways for scaling up health services through the lens of complex adaptive systems. Health Policy Plan. 2012;27(5):365-373. doi:10.1093/heapol/czr054
  10. Pacifico Silva H, Lehoux P, Miller FA, Denis JL. Introducing responsible innovation in health: a policy-oriented framework. Health Res Policy Syst. 2018;16(1):1-13. doi:10.1186/s12961-018-0362-5
  11. Cairney P. Complexity theory in political science and public policy. Political Stud. Rev. 2012;10(3):346-358. doi:10.1111/j.1478-9302.2012.00270.x
  12. Geyer R, Rahani S. Complexity and Public Policy. Complexity and Public Policy; 2014.
  13. Edelenbos J, van Meerkerk I, van Leeuwen C. Vitality of complex water governance systems: Condition and evolution. Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning. 2015;17(2):237-261. doi:10.1080/1523908X.2014.936584
  14. Klijn EH, Koppenjan JFM. Complexity in governance network theory. Complexity, Governance & Networks. 2014;1(1):61-70. doi:10.7564/14-CGN8
  15. Room G. Complexity, institutions and public policy: Agile decision-making in a turbulent world. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar; 2011.
  16. Pierre J, Peters BG. Governance without government? Rethinking public administration. J Public Adm Res Theory. 1998;8(2):223-243.
  17. Pelletier D, Gervais S, Hafeez-Ur-Rehman H, Sanou D, Tumwine J. Boundary-spanning actors in complex adaptive governance systems: The case of multisectoral nutrition. Int J Health Plann Manage. 2018;33(1):e293-e319. doi:10.1002/hpm.2468
  18. Van Lerberghe W, Mechbal A, Kronfol N. The Collaborative Governance of Lebanon’s Health Sector: Twenty Years of Efforts to Transform Health System Performance. Policy Support Observatory; 2018.
  19. Daniels N. Accountability for reasonableness. BMJ. 2000;321(7272):1300-1301.
  20. Daniels N, Sabin JE. Setting limits fairly: can we learn to share medical resources? Oxford Scholarship Online; 2009:1-206.