Search

Eswatini has the highest age-standardized incidence and second highest mortality rate related to cervical cancer globally. In Eswatini, community health workers educate communities about cervical cancer screening. They need to have accurate knowledge about cervical cancer and screening to do this effectively. Therefore, the current study aimed to assess knowledge regarding cervical cancer screening among community health workers in Eswatini. A telephone survey of 172 community health workers from eight selected constituencies was conducted. Descriptive analyses were performed to assess participants' socio-demographic and service-related characteristics. Linear regression was applied to investigate factors associated with cervical cancer screening-related knowledge. One hundred and seven (62%) participants answered at least 80% of the questions correctly. However, knowledge regarding cervical cancer risk factors, the meaning of screening results and Eswatini cervical cancer screening guidelines was suboptimal. Community health workers aged 46–55 were more likely (β = 1.27, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.39–2.15, p < 0.01) to have a higher cervical cancer screening knowledge score than those aged 30–45 years. Community health workers from Lubombo were marginally less likely (β = −0.83, 95% CI: −1.80 to −0.04, p = 0.05) to have a higher knowledge score than those from Hhohho. This study suggests knowledge deficits amongst community health workers in Eswatini. Knowledge deficits may result in inaccurate information being communicated to clients. While increasing knowledge of these vital health workers may not be sufficient to increase cervical cancer screening rates in Eswatini, it is an essential first step that should be the focus of future educational efforts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Audit and feedback is commonly used as a method of both monitoring and attempting to improve the quality of healthcare. No review has examined the literature on systems-level audit and feedback strategies to improve the quality of oncology care. This scoping review examines the number, care focus (technical, nontechnical, or both) and methodological quality of published intervention studies which have used systems-level audit and feedback intended to improve the quality of care delivered in oncology treatment centers. Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, and the Cochrane database were searched, from inception to March 2021, for intervention studies which examined the effectiveness of systems-level audit and feedback in improving care for cancer patients. Studies which met the Effective Practice and Organization of Care (EPOC) minimum design criteria were then assessed using the EPOC risk of bias tool. Study characteristics and outcomes were extracted for those meeting methodological criteria. A narrative approach was used to synthesize the results. A total of 32 intervention studies met the inclusion criteria, of which 53% focused on technical aspects of care, 31% focused on nontechnical and 16% focused on both. Four of the included 32 studies met the EPOC minimum design criteria (13%). Most studies had a before–after study design (75%; n = 24) and methodological quality of the final four studies was moderate. Audit and feedback studies involving oncology treatment centers have primarily focused on technical care aspects. The low number and moderate methodological quality of the studies make it difficult to draw clear inferences about the effectiveness of systems-level audit and feedback. Furthermore, high-quality audit and feedback interventions are required across technical and nontechnical aspects of care to quantify the effectiveness of strategies for improving cancer care and ensure healthcare resources are being optimized. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]