Search

Increasing global inequities have led to ongoing critiques of both the historical roots and current practices in global health. From this literature, questions have emerged about the future of global health and Canada's role in this future. However, there is little research exploring the role of Canadian policy for global health funding and the experience of stakeholders that currently implement projects with Canadian funding. This study explores stakeholder perspectives of how Canada's Feminist International Assistance Policy (FIAP) influences adolescent sexual and reproductive health (ASRH) projects and how these perspectives align with calls for change in global health as proposed by Chidwick et al. in the conceptual framework for an imagined future for global health. This study was conducted from February to May 2023 through eight interviews with key informants who were working on ASRH projects, funded through Global Affairs Canada. The study approach included stakeholder analysis and qualitative description. Results highlight the role of Canadian organizations in ASRH projects, importance of partnerships, influence of the FIAP, operational and contextual tensions that arise from implementing FIAP values in ASRH projects outside of Canada, along with stakeholder views on moving forward in global health policy and practice. Findings indicate that the language of the FIAP is aligned with calls for change in global health although there is opportunity for further action towards operationalizing this change. Specifically, findings highlight opportunity to create more flexible funding processes, expand monitoring and evaluation approaches to better include feminist approaches, promote rights-based and dignity-based practices in ASRH, and increase timelines to facilitate greater consultation and partnership building with communities. In conclusion, the FIAP creates an impactful foundation for change towards equity and justice in ASRH projects, although Canadian funding structures and processes need to continue to re-imagine how they support organizations to action these changes., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist., (Copyright: © 2024 Chidwick et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.)

Adolescent sexual and reproductive health (ASRH) in East Africa has prioritized research on the barriers to care, communication, and ASRH knowledge, attitudes, and practices. However, there is little research examining the extent to which meaningful adolescent engagement in research is achieved in practice and how this influences the evidence available to inform ASRH services. This review offers a critical step towards understanding current approaches to adolescent engagement in ASRH research and identifying opportunities to build a strengthened evidence base with adolescent voices at the centre. This scoping review is based on Arksey and O'Malley's (2005) framework, employing a keyword search of four databases via OVID: Medline, Global Health, Embase and PsycINFO. Two reviewers screened title, abstract and full text to select articles examining ASRH in Tanzania, Rwanda, Kenya, and Uganda, published between 2000 and 2020. After articles were selected, data was extracted, synthesized, and thematically organized to highlight emerging themes and potential opportunities for further research. The search yielded 1201 results, 34 of which were included in the final review. Results highlight the methods used to gather adolescent perspectives of ASRH (qualitative), the content of those perspectives (knowledge, sources of information, gaps in information and adolescent friendly services), and the overall narratives that frame discussions of ASRH (risky sexual behaviour, stigma, and gender norms). Findings indicate the extent of adolescent engagement in ASRH research is limited, resulting in a lack of comprehensive evidence, consistent challenges with stigma, little information on holistic concepts and a narrow framing of ASRH. In conclusion, there is opportunity for more meaningful engagement of adolescents in ASRH research. This engagement can be achieved by involving adolescents more comprehensively throughout the research cycle and by expanding the range of ASRH topics explored, as identified by adolescents., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist., (Copyright: © 2022 Chidwick et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.)

Background: Malaria in pregnancy is a significant public health concern in Nigeria. It threatens pregnant women and their unborn babies and undermines the achievement of Sustainable Development Goal 3. The World Health Organization has recommended intermittent preventive treatment with sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine [IPTp-SP] for its control, but there are challenges to its access and uptake., Methods: Using the Arksey and O'Malley framework and the cascade of care model, we conducted a scoping review to investigate barriers and facilitators of IPTp-SP access and uptake, including their influence on pregnant women's health-seeking behaviour for the control of malaria in pregnancy in Nigeria. We searched seven scientific databases for papers published from 2005 to date., Results: We included a total of 31 out of 2149 articles in the review. Poor provider knowledge of the IPTp-SP protocol and lack of essential commodities for sulphadoxine-pyrimethamine administration in clinics are significant barriers to IPTp-SP use. Staff shortages and poor remuneration of health care professionals are obstacles to IPTp-SP utilisation., Conclusions: To improve IPTp-SP access and uptake, the government should ensure a continuous supply to clinics and support the employment of additional health care professionals who should be well paid and trained on using the IPTp-SP protocol., Competing Interests: The authors declare that they have no competing interests., (Copyright © 2022 Ogba et al.)

Medication adherence is an essential step in the malaria treatment cascade. We conducted a qualitative study embedded within a randomized controlled trial comparing the adherence to the recommended dosing of two artemisinin-based combination therapies (ACT) to treat uncomplicated malaria in Freetown, Sierra Leone. This study explored the circumstances and factors that influenced caregiver adherence to the ACT prescribed for their child in the trial. In-depth interviews were conducted with 49 caregivers; all interviews were recorded, transcribed, and translated. Transcripts were coded and aggregated into themes, applying a thematic content approach. We identified four key factors that influenced optimal treatment adherence: (1) health system influences, (2) health services, (3) caregivers' experiences with malaria illness and treatment, and (4) medication characteristics. Specifically, caregivers reported confidence in the health system as facilities were well maintained and care was free. They also felt that health workers provided quality care, leading them to trust the health workers and believe the test results. Ease of medication administration and perceived risk of side effects coupled with caregivers' prior experience treating malaria influenced how medications were administered. To ensure ACTs achieve maximum effectiveness, consideration of these contextual factors and further development of child-friendly antimalarials are needed.

Background: Global health is a term often used interchangeably with international health due to overlapping similarities and unclear distinctions. While some international health supporters argue that global health as a field is unnecessary as it is simply a duplicate of international health, global health supporters argue that global health is unique; for instance, it actively includes elements of empowerment and promotes cross-border collaboration., Objective: To investigate differences and similarities in research representing the fields of global and international health., Methods: We analyzed all the articles published in 2017 in two comparable academic journals representing the fields of global health ( Annals of Global Health , AGH) and international health ( International Health Journal , IHJ). Abstracted data included: research design and methods, income status of country of study, empowerment recommendations for practice, participation and research collaboration., Findings: Most studies in both AGH and IHJ used quantitative research methods but were significantly more common in IHJ (70%) compared to AGH (48%), whereas mores studies in AGH (17%) than IHJ (9%) used mixed methods. The majority of studies in both journals focused on low- or lower-middle income countries whereas more AGH studies (16%) focused on high-income countries compared to the IHJ studies (4%). It was more common in the AGH studies to make empowerment recommendations (90%) and to include stakeholders/users in the study (40%) compared to the IHJ studies (75% empowerment recommendations and 18% stakeholder/user participation). No difference was observed regarding cross-border research collaboration., Conclusions: This study does not show great differences between global health and international health research; however, there are still some differences indicating that global health emphasises different aspects of research compared to international health. More research is necessary to understand whether and how the distinctions between the definitions of global and international health are applied in real life, in research and beyond., Competing Interests: The authors have no competing interests to declare., (Copyright: © 2020 The Author(s).)

Since 2010, the World Health Organization has been recommending that all suspected cases of malaria be confirmed with parasite-based diagnosis before treatment. These guidelines represent a paradigm shift away from presumptive antimalarial treatment of fever. Malaria rapid diagnostic tests (mRDTs) are central to implementing this policy, intended to target artemisinin-based combination therapies (ACT) to patients with confirmed malaria and to improve management of patients with nonmalarial fevers. The ACT Consortium conducted ten linked studies, eight in sub-Saharan Africa and two in Afghanistan, to evaluate the impact of mRDT introduction on case management across settings that vary in malaria endemicity and healthcare provider type. This synthesis includes 562,368 outpatient encounters (study size range 2,400-432,513). mRDTs were associated with significantly lower ACT prescription (range 8-69% versus 20-100%). Prescribing did not always adhere to malaria test results; in several settings, ACTs were prescribed to more than 30% of test-negative patients or to fewer than 80% of test-positive patients. Either an antimalarial or an antibiotic was prescribed for more than 75% of patients across most settings; lower antimalarial prescription for malaria test-negative patients was partly offset by higher antibiotic prescription. Symptomatic management with antipyretics alone was prescribed for fewer than 25% of patients across all scenarios. In community health worker and private retailer settings, mRDTs increased referral of patients to other providers. This synthesis provides an overview of shifts in case management that may be expected with mRDT introduction and highlights areas of focus to improve design and implementation of future case management programs.

Objectives  To examine the impact of use of rapid diagnostic tests for malaria on prescribing of antimicrobials, specifically antibiotics, for acute febrile illness in Africa and Asia. Design  Analysisof nine preselected linked and codesigned observational and randomised studies (eight cluster or individually randomised trials and one observational study). Setting  Public and private healthcare settings, 2007-13, in Afghanistan, Cameroon, Ghana, Nigeria, Tanzania, and Uganda. Participants  522 480 children and adults with acute febrile illness. Interventions  Rapid diagnostic tests for malaria. Main outcome measures  Proportions of patients for whom an antibiotic was prescribed in trial groups who had undergone rapid diagnostic testing compared with controls and in patients with negative test results compared with patients with positive results. A secondary aim compared classes of antibiotics prescribed in different settings. Results  Antibiotics were prescribed to 127 052/238 797 (53%) patients in control groups and 167 714/283 683 (59%) patients in intervention groups. Antibiotics were prescribed to 40% (35 505/89 719) of patients with a positive test result for malaria and to 69% (39 400/57 080) of those with a negative result. All but one study showed a trend toward more antibiotic prescribing in groups who underwent rapid diagnostic tests. Random effects meta-analysis of the trials showed that the overall risk of antibiotic prescription was 21% higher (95% confidence interval 7% to 36%) in intervention settings. In most intervention settings, patients with negative test results received more antibiotic prescriptions than patients with positive results for all the most commonly used classes: penicillins, trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (one exception), tetracyclines, and metronidazole. Conclusions  Introduction of rapid diagnostic tests for malaria to reduce unnecessary use of antimalarials-a beneficial public health outcome-could drive up untargeted use of antibiotics. That 69% of patients were prescribed antibiotics when test results were negative probably represents overprescription.This included antibiotics from several classes, including those like metronidazole that are seldom appropriate for febrile illness, across varied clinical, health system, and epidemiological settings. It is often assumed that better disease specific diagnostics will reduce antimicrobial overuse, but they might simply shift it from one antimicrobial class to another. Current global implementation of malaria testing might increase untargeted antibiotic use and must be examined., (Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions.)

Background: Rapid diagnostic tests for malaria (mRDTs) have been scaled-up widely across Africa. The PRIME study evaluated an intervention aiming to improve fever case management using mRDTs at public health centers in Uganda., Methods: A cluster-randomized trial was conducted from 2010-13 in Tororo, a high malaria transmission setting. Twenty public health centers were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to intervention or control. The intervention included training in health center management, fever case management with mRDTs, and patient-centered services; plus provision of mRDTs and artemether-lumefantrine (AL) when stocks ran low. Three rounds of Interviews were conducted with caregivers of children under five years of age as they exited health centers (N = 1400); reference mRDTs were done in children with fever (N = 1336). Health worker perspectives on mRDTs were elicited through semi-structured questionnaires (N = 49) and in-depth interviews (N = 10). The primary outcome was inappropriate treatment of malaria, defined as the proportion of febrile children who were not treated according to guidelines based on the reference mRDT., Findings: There was no difference in inappropriate treatment of malaria between the intervention and control arms (24.0% versus 29.7%, adjusted risk ratio 0.81 [95% CI: 0.56, 1.17] p = 0.24). Most children (76.0%) tested positive by reference mRDT, but many were not prescribed AL (22.5% intervention versus 25.9% control, p = 0.53). Inappropriate treatment of children testing negative by reference mRDT with AL was also common (31.3% invention vs 42.4% control, p = 0.29). Health workers appreciated mRDTs but felt that integrating testing into practice was challenging given constraints on time and infrastructure., Conclusions: The PRIME intervention did not have the desired impact on inappropriate treatment of malaria for children under five. In this high transmission setting, use of mRDTs did not lead to the reductions in antimalarial prescribing seen elsewhere. Broader investment in health systems, including infrastructure and staffing, will be required to improve fever case management.

Optimizing quality of care for malaria and other febrile illnesses is a complex challenge of major public health importance. To evaluate the impact of an intervention aiming to improve malaria case management on the health of community children, a cluster-randomized trial was conducted from 2010-2013 in Tororo, Uganda, where malaria transmission is high. Twenty public health centers were included; 10 were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to intervention or control. Households within 2 km of health centers provided the sampling frame for the evaluation. The PRIME intervention included training in fever case management using malaria rapid diagnostic tests (mRDTs), patient-centered services, and health center management; plus provision of mRDTs and artemether-lumefantrine. Cross-sectional community surveys were conducted at baseline and endline (N = 8,766), and a cohort of children was followed for approximately 18 months (N = 992). The primary outcome was prevalence of anemia (hemoglobin < 11.0 g/dL) in children under 5 years of age in the final community survey. The intervention was delivered successfully; however, no differences in prevalence of anemia or parasitemia were observed between the study arms in the final community survey or the cohort. In the final survey, prevalence of anemia in children under 5 years of age was 62.5% in the intervention versus 63.1% in control (adjusted risk ratio = 1.01; 95% confidence interval = 0.91-1.13; P = 0.82). The PRIME intervention, focusing on training and commodities, did not produce the expected health benefits in community children in Tororo. This challenges common assumptions that improving quality of care and access to malaria diagnostics will yield health gains., (© The American Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene.)

Background: In Uganda, health system challenges limit access to good quality healthcare and contribute to slow progress on malaria control. We developed a complex intervention (PRIME), which was designed to improve quality of care for malaria at public health centres., Objective: Responding to calls for increased transparency, we describe the PRIME intervention's design process, rationale, and final content and reflect on the choices and challenges encountered during the design of this complex intervention., Design: To develop the intervention, we followed a multistep approach, including the following: 1) formative research to identify intervention target areas and objectives; 2) prioritization of intervention components; 3) review of relevant evidence; 4) development of intervention components; 5) piloting and refinement of workshop modules; and 6) consolidation of the PRIME intervention theories of change to articulate why and how the intervention was hypothesized to produce desired outcomes. We aimed to develop an intervention that was evidence-based, grounded in theory, and appropriate for the study context; could be evaluated within a randomized controlled trial; and had the potential to be scaled up sustainably., Results: The process of developing the PRIME intervention package was lengthy and dynamic. The final intervention package consisted of four components: 1) training in fever case management and use of rapid diagnostic tests for malaria (mRDTs); 2) workshops in health centre management; 3) workshops in patient-centred services; and 4) provision of mRDTs and antimalarials when stocks ran low., Conclusions: The slow and iterative process of intervention design contrasted with the continually shifting study context. We highlight the considerations and choices made at each design stage, discussing elements we included and why, as well as those that were ultimately excluded. Reflection on and reporting of 'behind the scenes' accounts of intervention design may improve the design, assessment, and generalizability of complex interventions and their evaluations.