Project description:OBJECTIVE:To systematically review and critically appraise the evidence for the effects of interventions to improve the performance of community health workers (CHWs) for community-based primary healthcare in low- and middle-income countries. DESIGN:Systematic review following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. METHODS:19 electronic databases were searched with a highly sensitive prespecified strategy and the grey literature examined, completed July 2016. Randomised controlled trials evaluating interventions to improve CHW performance in low- and middle-income countries were included and appraised for risk of bias. Outcomes were biological and behavioural patient outcomes (primary), use of health services, quality of care provided by CHWs and CHW retention (secondary). RESULTS:Two reviewers screened 8082 records; 14 evaluations were included. Due to heterogeneity and lack of clear outcome data, no meta-analysis was conducted. Results were presented in a narrative summary. The review found one study showing no effect on the biological outcomes of interest, though these moderate quality data may not be indicative of all biological outcomes. It also found moderate quality evidence of the efficacy of performance improvement interventions for (1) improving behavioural outcomes for patients, (2) improving use of services by increasing the absolute number of patients who access services and, perhaps, better identifying those who would benefit from such services and (3) improving CHW quality of care in terms of upstream measures like completion of prescribed activities and downstream measures like adherence to treatment protocols. Nearly half of studies were compound interventions, making it difficult to isolate the effects of individual performance improvement intervention components, though four specific strategies pertaining to recruitment, supervision, incentivisation and equipment were identified. CONCLUSIONS:Variations in recruitment, supervision, incentivisation and equipment may improve CHW performance. Practitioners should, however, assess the relevance and feasibility of these strategies in their health setting prior to implementation. Component selection experiments on a greater range of interventions to improve performance ought to be conducted.

Project description:BackgroundAntimicrobial misuse is common in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs), and this practice is a driver of antibiotic resistance. We compared community-based antibiotic access and use practices across communities in LMICs to identify contextually specific targets for interventions to improve antibiotic use practices.MethodsWe did quantitative and qualitative assessments of antibiotic access and use in six LMICs across Africa (Mozambique, Ghana, and South Africa) and Asia (Bangladesh, Vietnam, and Thailand) over a 2·5-year study period (July 1, 2016-Dec 31, 2018). We did quantitative assessments of community antibiotic access and use through supplier mapping, customer exit interviews, and household surveys. These quantitative assessments were triangulated with qualitative drug supplier and consumer interviews and discussions.FindingsVietnam and Bangladesh had the largest proportions of non-licensed antibiotic dispensing points. For mild illness, drug stores were the most common point of contact when seeking antibiotics in most countries, except South Africa and Mozambique, where public facilities were most common. Self-medication with antibiotics was found to be widespread in Vietnam (55·2% of antibiotics dispensed without prescription), Bangladesh (45·7%), and Ghana (36·1%), but less so in Mozambique (8·0%), South Africa (1·2%), and Thailand (3·9%). Self-medication was considered to be less time consuming, cheaper, and overall, more convenient than accessing them through health-care facilities. Factors determining where treatment was sought often involved relevant policies, trust in the supplier and the drug, disease severity, and whether the antibiotic was intended for a child. Confusion regarding how to identify oral antibiotics was revealed in both Africa and Asia.InterpretationContextual complexities and differences between countries with different incomes, policy frameworks, and cultural norms were revealed. These contextual differences render a single strategy inadequate and instead necessitate context-tailored, integrated intervention packages to improve antibiotic use in LMICs as part of global efforts to combat antibiotic resistance.FundingWellcome Trust and Volkswagen Foundation.

Project description:In many low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), a poor link between antibiotic policies and practices exists. Numerous contextual factors may influence the degree of antibiotic access, appropriateness of antibiotic provision, and actual use in communities. Therefore, improving appropriateness of antibiotic use in different communities in LMICs probably requires interventions tailored to the setting of interest, accounting for cultural context. Here we present the ABACUS study (AntiBiotic ACcess and USe), which employs a unique approach and infrastructure, enabling quantitative validation, contextualization of determinants, and cross-continent comparisons of antibiotic access and use. The community infrastructure for this study is the INDEPTH-Network (International Network for the Demographic Evaluation of Populations and Their Health in Developing Countries), which facilitates health and population research through an established health and demographic surveillance system. After an initial round of formative qualitative research with community members and antibiotic suppliers in three African and three Asian countries, household surveys will assess the appropriateness of antibiotic access, provision and use. Results from this sample will be validated against a systematically conducted inventory of suppliers. All potential antibiotic suppliers will be mapped and characterized. Subsequently, their supply of antibiotics to the community will be measured through customer exit interviews, which tend to be more reliable than bulk purchase or sales data. Discrepancies identified between reported and observed antibiotic practices will be investigated in further qualitative interviews. Amartya Sen's Capability Approach will be employed to identify the conversion factors that determine whether or not, and the extent to which appropriate provision of antibiotics may lead to appropriate access and use of antibiotics. Currently, the study is ongoing and expected to conclude by 2019. ABACUS will provide important new insights into antibiotic practices in LMICs to inform social interventions aimed at promoting optimal antibiotic use, thereby preserving antibiotic effectiveness.

Project description:BackgroundHypertension (HTN) and diabetes mellitus (DM) are highly prevalent in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC) and a leading cause of morbidity and mortality. Recent evidence on effectiveness of primary care interventions has attracted renewed calls for their implementation. This review aims to synthesize evidence pertaining to primary care interventions on these two diseases, evaluated and tested in LMICs.MethodsTwo reviewers conducted an electronic search of three databases (Pubmed, EMBASE and Web of Science) and screened for eligible articles. Interventions covering health promotion, prevention, treatment, or rehabilitation activities at the PHC or community level were included.?Studies published in English, French, Portuguese and Spanish, from January 2007 to January 2017, were included. Key extraction variables included the 12 criteria identified by the Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR) checklist and guide. The Innovative Care for Chronic Conditions Framework (ICCCF) was used to guide analysis and reporting of results.Results198 articles were analyzed. The strategies focused on healthcare service organization (76.5%), community level (9.7 %), creating a positive policy environment (3.6%) and strategies covering multiple domains (10.2%). Studies included related to the following topics: description or testing of interventions (n=81; 41.3%), implementation or evaluation projects (n=42; 21.4%), quality improvement initiatives (n=15; 7.7%), screening and prevention efforts (n=26; 13.2%), management of HTN or DM (n=13; 6.6%), integrated health services (n=10; 5.1%), knowledge and attitude surveys (n=5; 2.5%), cost-effective lab tests (n=2; 1%) and policy making efforts (n=2; 1%). Most studies reported interventions by non-specialists (n=86; 43.4%) and multidisciplinary teams (n=49; 25.5%).ConclusionOnly 198 articles were found over a 10 year period which demonstrates the limited published research on highly prevalent diseases in LMIC. This review shows the variety and complexity of approaches that have been tested to address HTN and DM in LMICs and highlights the elements of interventions needed to be addressed in order to strengthen delivery of care. Most studies reported little information regarding implementation processes to allow replication. Given the need for multi-component complex interventions, study designs and evaluation techniques will need to be adapted by including process evaluations versus simply effectiveness or outcome evaluations.

Project description:BackgroundEvidence on the effectiveness of youth-led interventions for improving maternal-neonatal health and well-being of women and gender diverse childbearing people in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) is incomplete. We aimed to summarise the evidence on whether community level youth-led interventions can improve maternal and neonatal outcomes in LMICs.MethodsWe included experimental studies of youth-led interventions versus no intervention, standard care, or another intervention. Participants were women and gender diverse childbearing people during antepartum, intrapartum, and postpartum periods. MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Global Health, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library, and grey literature were searched to January 2023. All interventions addressing and targeting maternal-neonatal health and well-being that were youth-led and community level were included. Primary outcomes of interest were maternal death and neonatal death. We excluded based on population, intervention, comparison, and outcome (PICO) and design. Two reviewers independently extracted key information from each included study and assessed risk of bias. Random-effects meta-analysis was performed where there were sufficient data. The certainty of evidence was assessed using Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE). A narrative synthesis was done for results that could not be pooled.ResultsOf the 8054 records retrieved, four trials (21 813 enrolled participants) met the inclusion criteria. The Cooperative for Assistance and Relieve Everywhere, Inc. (CARE) Community Score Card intervention compared to standard reproductive health services control did not significantly improve Antenatal Care coverage (difference-in-differences estimate β = 0.04; 95% confidence interval (CI) = -0.11, 0.18, P = 0.610; one study, low certainty of evidence). The multi-component social mobilisation interventions compared to standard of care had no effect on adolescent/youth pregnancy (adjusted odds ratio estimate = 1.08; 95% CI = 0.87, 1.33; three studies; low certainty of evidence).ConclusionsYouth-led interventions in LMICs did not show a significant improvement in maternal outcomes. More studies are required to make more precise conclusions.RegistrationPROSPERO: CRD42021288798.

Dataset Information

Community-level interventions for improving access to food in low- and middle-income countries.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets