Search

Background: Artemisinin-based combination therapy (ACT) following a confirmed parasitological diagnosis is recommended by the World Health Organization (WHO) and the Congolese National Malaria Control Program (NMCP). However, commitment and competence of all stakeholders (patients, medical professionals, governments and funders) is required to achieve effective case management and secure the "useful therapeutic life" of the recommended drugs. The health seeking behaviour of patients and health care professionals' practices for malaria management were assessed. Methods: This was an observational study embedded in a two-stage cluster randomized survey conducted in one health centre (HC) in each of the 12 selected health zones in Kinshasa city. All patients with clinical malaria diagnosis were eligible. Their health seeking behaviour was recorded on a specific questionnaire, as well as the health care practitioners' practices. The last were not aware that their practices would be assessed. Results: Six hundred and twenty four patients were assessed, of whom 136 (21.8%) were under five years. Three hundred and thirty five (55%) had taken medication prior to the current consultation (self -medication with any product or visiting another HC) of whom 47(14%) took an antimalarial drug, and 56 (9%) were treated presumptively. Among those, 53.6% received monotherapy either with quinine, artesunate, phytomedicines, sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine or amodiaquine. On the other side, when clinicians were informed about laboratory results, monotherapy was prescribed in 39.9% of the confirmed malaria cases. Only 285 patients (45.7%) were managed in line with WHO and NMCP guidelines, of whom 120 (19.2%) were prescribed an ACT after positive blood smear and 165 (26.4%) received no antimalarial after a negative result. Conclusion: This study shows the discrepancy between malaria policies and the reality on the field in Kinshasa, regarding patients' health seeking behaviour and health professionals' practices. Consequently, the poor compliance to the policies may contribute to the genesis and spread of antimalarial drug resistance and also have a negative impact on the burden of the disease. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Malaria case management is a key strategy for malaria control. Effective coverage of parasite-based malaria diagnosis (PMD) remains limited in malaria endemic countries. This study assessed the health system's capacity to absorb PMD at primary health care facilities in Uganda. Methods: In a cross sectional survey, using multi-stage cluster sampling, lower level health facilities (LLHF) in 11 districts in Uganda were assessed for 1) tools, 2) skills, 3) staff and infrastructure, and 4) structures, systems and roles necessary for the implementing of PMD. Results: Tools for PMD (microscopy and/or RDTs) were available at 30 (24%) of the 125 LLHF. All LLHF had patient registers and 15% had functional in-patient facilities. Three months' long stock-out periods were reported for oral and parenteral quinine at 39% and 47% of LLHF respectively. Out of 131 health workers interviewed, 86 (66%) were nursing assistants; 56 (43%) had received on-job training on malaria case management and 47 (36%) had adequate knowledge in malaria case management. Overall, only 18% (131/730) Ministry of Health approved staff positions were filled by qualified personnel and 12% were recruited or transferred within six months preceding the survey. Of 186 patients that received referrals from LLHF, 130(70%) had received pre-referral anti-malarial drugs, none received pre-referral rectal artesunate and 35% had been referred due to poor response to antimalarial drugs. Conclusion: Primary health care facilities had inadequate human and infrastructural capacity to effectively implement universal parasite-based malaria diagnosis. The priority capacity building needs identified were: 1) recruitment and retention of qualified staff, 2) comprehensive training of health workers in fever management, 3) malaria diagnosis quality control systems and 4) strengthening of supply chain, stock management and referral systems. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Integrated Infectious Diseases Capacity Building Evaluation (IDCAP) teams designed and implemented two health worker in-service training approaches: 1) an off-site classroom-based integrated management of infectious diseases (IMID) course with distance learning aspects, and 2) on-site support (OSS), an educational outreach intervention. We tested the effects of OSS on workload and 12 facility performance indicators for emergency triage assessment and treatment, HIV testing, and malaria and pneumonia case management among outpatients by two subgroups: 1) mid-level practitioners (MLP) who attended IMID training (IMID-MLP) and 2) health workers who did not (No-IMID).Methods: Thirty-six health facilities participated in the IDCAP trial, with 18 randomly assigned to Arm A and 18 to Arm B. Two MLP in both arms received IMID. All providers at Arm A facilities received nine monthly OSS visits from April to December 2010 while Arm B did not. From November 2009 to December 2010, 777,667 outpatient visits occurred. We analyzed 669,580 (86.1 %) outpatient visits, where provider cadre was reported. Treatment was provided by 64 IMID-MLP and 1,515 No-IMID providers. The effect of OSS was measured by the difference in pre/post changes across arms after controlling for covariates (adjusted ratio of relative risks = a RRR).Results: The effect of OSS on patients-per-provider-per-day (workload) among IMID-MLP (aRRR = 1.21; p = 0.48) and No-IMID (aRRR = 0.90; p = 0.44) was not statistically significant. Among IMID-MLP, OSS was effective for three indicators: malaria cases receiving an appropriate antimalarial (aRRR = 1.26, 99 % CI = 1.02-1.56), patients with negative malaria test result prescribed an antimalarial (aRRR = 0.49, 99 % CI = 0.26-0.92), and patients with acid-fast bacilli smear negative result receiving empiric treatment for acute respiratory infection (aRRR = 2.04, 99 % CI = 1.06-3.94). Among No-IMID, OSS was effective for two indicators: emergency and priority patients admitted, detained or referred (aRRR = 2.12, 99 % CI = 1.05-4.28) and emergency patients receiving at least one appropriate treatment (aRRR = 1.98, 99 % CI = 1.21-3.24).Conclusion: Effects of OSS on workload were not statistically significant. Significant OSS effects on facility performance across subgroups were heterogeneous. OSS supported MLP who diagnosed and treated patients to apply IMID knowledge. For other providers, OSS supported team work to manage emergency patients. This evidence on OSS effectiveness could inform interventions to improve health workers' capacity to deliver better quality infectious diseases care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]