Dataset Information

Task-sharing interventions for improving control of diabetes in low-income and middle-income countries: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Task-sharing interventions using non-physician health-care workers might be a potential diabetes management strategy in health systems that are constrained by physician shortages, such as those in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs).

Methods

We did a systematic review and meta-analysis of task-sharing intervention strategies for managing type 2 diabetes in LMICs. We searched PubMed, Embase, and CINAHL from database inception to Sept 25, 2019, for studies that were randomised control trials or cluster randomised trials with task-shifted or task-shared interventions delivered to adults (≥18 years) by non-physician health workers versus usual care, done in LMICs with glycated haemoglobin (HbA_1c) or fasting blood sugar (FBS) as outcome measures. The methodological quality of included studies was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Random-effects model meta-analysis was used to estimate the population average pooled mean difference for HbA_1c and FBS with 95% CIs. Our study protocol was registered in the PROSPERO database (CRD42018081015).

Findings

We found 4213 studies from the literature search, of which 46 (1·1%) were eligible for the narrative synthesis, including a total of 16 973 participants. 16 of these studies were excluded from the meta-analysis due to high risk of bias. 24 studies with a total of 5345 participants were included in the meta-analysis of HbA_1c and 18 studies with a total of 3287 participants for FBS. Interventions led to an average reduction in HbA_1c when tasks were delivered by nurses (averaged pooled mean difference -0·54% [95% CI -0·89 to -0·18]; I²=80%) and pharmacists (-0·91% [-1·15 to -0·68]; I²=58%), but not when they were delivered by dietitians (-0·50% [-1·10 to 0·09]; I²=54%) or community health workers (0·05% [0·03 to 0·07]; I²=0%). A reduction in average FBS was also observed when interventions were delivered by pharmacists (average pooled mean difference -36·26 mg/dL [-52·60 to -19·92]; I²=78%) but not nurses (-7·46 mg/dL [-18·44 to 3·52]; I²=79%) or community health workers (-5·41 [-12·74 to 1·92]; I²=71%). Only one study reported on FBS when tasks were delivered by dietitians, with a mean difference of -35·00 mg/dL (-65·96 to -4·04).

Interpretation

Task sharing interventions with non-physician healthcare workers show moderate effectiveness in diabetes management in LMIC settings. Although relatively high heterogeneity limits the interpretation of the overall findings, interventions led by pharmacists and nurses in LMICs with relatively high physician density are effective strategies in the management of diabetes.

Funding

Wellcome Trust-Department of Biotechnology India Alliance.

SUBMITTER: Maria JL

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8279953 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundOne of the potential strategies to improve health care delivery in understaffed low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) is task sharing, where specific tasks are transferred from more qualified health care cadre to a lesser trained cadre. Dyslipidemia is a major risk factor for cardiovascular disease but often it is not managed appropriately.ObjectiveWe conducted a systematic review with the objective to identify and evaluate the effect of task sharing interventions on dyslipidemia in LMICs.MethodsPublished studies (randomized controlled trials and observational studies) were identified via electronic databases such as PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, PsycINFO, and CINAHL. We searched the databases from inception to September 2016 and updated till 30 June 2017, using search terms related to task shifting, and cardiovascular disease prevention in LMICs. All eligible studies were summarized narratively, and potential studies were grouped for meta-analysis.ResultsAlthough our search yielded 2938 records initially and another 1628 in the updated search, only 15 studies met the eligibility criteria. Most of the studies targeted lifestyle modification and care coordination by involving nurses or allied health workers. Eight randomized controlled trials were included in the meta-analysis. Task sharing intervention were effective in lowering low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (-6.90 mg/dL; 95% CI -11.81 to -1.99) and total cholesterol (-9.44 mg/dL; 95% CI -17.94 to -0.93) levels with modest effect size. However, there were no major differences in high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (-0.29 mg/dL; 95% CI -0.88 to 1.47) and triglycerides (-14.31 mg/dL; 95% CI -33.32 to 4.69). The overall quality of evidence based on Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation was either "low" or "very low".ConclusionAvailable data are not adequate to make recommendations on the role of task sharing strategies for the management of dyslipidemia in LMICs. However, the studies conducted in LMICs demonstrate the potential use of this strategy especially in terms of reduction in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol and total cholesterol levels. Our review calls for the need of well-designed and large-scale studies to demonstrate the effect of task-sharing strategy on lipid management in LMICs.

Project description:BackgroundPerinatal depression is common in low and middle income countries (LAMICs). Task sharing interventions have been implemented to treat perinatal depression in these settings, as a way of dealing with staff shortages. Task sharing allows lay health workers to provide services for less complex cases while being trained and supervised by specialists. Randomized controlled trials suggest that these interventions can be effective but there is limited qualitative information exploring barriers and facilitators to their implementation. This systematic review aims to systematically review current qualitative evidence of process evaluations of task sharing interventions for perinatal depression in LAMICs in relation to the United Kingdom (UK) Medical Research Council (MRC) framework for conducting process evaluations.MethodsWe searched Medline/ PubMed, PsycINFO, Scopus, Cochrane Library and Web of science for studies from LAMICS using search terms under the broad categories of: (a) "maternal depression'" (b) "intervention" (c) "lay counsellor" OR "community health worker" OR "non-specialist" and (d) "LAMICs". Abstracts were independently reviewed for inclusion by two authors. Full text articles were screened and data for included articles were extracted using a standard data extraction sheet. Qualitative synthesis of qualitative evidence was conducted.Results8420 articles were identified from initial searches. Of these, 26 full text articles were screened for eligibility with only three studies meeting the inclusion criteria. Main findings revealed that participants identified the following crucial factors: contextual factors included physical location, accessibility and cultural norms. Implementation factors included acceptability of the intervention and characteristics of the personnel. Mechanisms included counsellor factors such as motivating and facilitating trust; intervention factors such as use of stories and visual aids, and understandability of the content; and participant factors such as shared experience, meeting learning needs, and meeting expectations.ConclusionsWhile task sharing has been suggested as an effective way of filling the treatment gap for perinatal depression, there is a paucity of qualitative research exploring barriers and facilitators to implementing these interventions. Qualitative process evaluations are crucial for the development of culturally relevant interventions.

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:BackgroundTask-sharing is a promising strategy to expand mental healthcare in low-resource settings, especially in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Research on how to best implement task-sharing mental health interventions, however, is hampered by an incomplete understanding of the barriers and facilitators to their implementation. This review aims to systematically identify implementation barriers and facilitators in evidence-based task-sharing mental health interventions using an implementation science lens, organizing factors across a novel, integrated implementation science framework.MethodsPubMed, PsychINFO, CINAHL, and Embase were used to identify English-language, peer-reviewed studies using search terms for three categories: "mental health," "task-sharing," and "LMIC." Articles were included if they: focused on mental disorders as the main outcome(s); included a task-sharing intervention using or based on an evidence-based practice; were implemented in an LMIC setting; and included assessment or data-supported analysis of barriers and facilitators. An initial conceptual model and coding framework derived from the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research and the Theoretical Domains Framework was developed and iteratively refined to create an integrated conceptual framework, the Barriers and Facilitators in Implementation of Task-Sharing Mental Health Interventions (BeFITS-MH), which specifies 37 constructs across eight domains: (I) client characteristics, (II) provider characteristics, (III) family and community factors, (IV) organizational characteristics, (V) societal factors, (VI) mental health system factors, (VII) intervention characteristics, and (VIII) stigma.ResultsOf the 26,935 articles screened (title and abstract), 192 articles underwent full-text review, yielding 37 articles representing 28 unique intervention studies that met the inclusion criteria. The most prevalent facilitators occur in domains that are more amenable to adaptation (i.e., the intervention and provider characteristics domains), while salient barriers occur in domains that are more challenging to modulate or intervene on-these include constructs in the client characteristics as well as the broader societal and structural levels of influence (i.e., the organizational, mental health system domains). Other notable trends include constructs in the family and community domains occurring as barriers and as facilitators roughly equally, and stigma constructs acting exclusively as barriers.ConclusionsUsing the BeFITS-MH model we developed based on implementation science frameworks, this systematic review provides a comprehensive identification and organization of barriers and facilitators to evidence-based task-sharing mental health interventions in LMICs. These findings have important implications for ongoing and future implementation of this critically needed intervention strategy, including the promise of leveraging task-sharing intervention characteristics as sites of continued innovation, the importance of but relative lack of engagement with constructs in macro-level domains (e.g., organizational characteristics, stigma), and the need for more delineation of strategies for task-sharing mental health interventions that researchers and implementers can employ to enhance implementation in and across levels.Trial registrationPROSPERO CRD42020161357.

Project description:ObjectiveTo evaluate evidence from published randomised controlled trials (RCTs) for the use of task-shifting strategies for cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk reduction in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs).DesignSystematic review of RCTs that utilised a task-shifting strategy in the management of CVD in LMICs.Data sourcesWe searched the following databases for relevant RCTs: PubMed from the 1940s, EMBASE from 1974, Global Health from 1910, Ovid Health Star from 1966, Web of Knowledge from 1900, Scopus from 1823, CINAHL from 1937 and RCTs from ClinicalTrials.gov.Eligibility criteria for selecting studiesWe focused on RCTs published in English, but without publication year. We included RCTs in which the intervention used task shifting (non-physician healthcare workers involved in prescribing of medications, treatment and/or medical testing) and non-physician healthcare providers in the management of CV risk factors and diseases (hypertension, diabetes, hyperlipidaemia, stroke, coronary artery disease or heart failure), as well as RCTs that were conducted in LMICs. We excluded studies that are not RCTs.ResultsOf the 2771 articles identified, only three met the predefined criteria. All three trials were conducted in practice-based settings among patients with hypertension (2 studies) and diabetes (1 study), with one study also incorporating home visits. The duration of the studies ranged from 3 to 12 months, and the task-shifting strategies included provision of medication prescriptions by nurses, community health workers and pharmacists and telephone follow-up posthospital discharge. Both hypertension studies reported a significant mean blood pressure reduction (2/1 mm Hg and 30/15 mm Hg), and the diabetes trial reported a reduction in the glycated haemoglobin levels of 1.87%.ConclusionsThere is a dearth of evidence on the implementation of task-shifting strategies to reduce the burden of CVD in LMICs. Effective task-shifting interventions targeted at reducing the global CVD epidemic in LMICs are urgently needed.