Healthcare is one of the many human-centered services offered, the other being legal services, hospitality services, transport services, etc. The healthcare is also the foremost in all of these personal services. Every section of the healthcare experience must embody and convey the message that the hospital is the center of health and wellness in the community. The connection between healthcare provider and patient needs to be developed to improve the delivery model.However with the rise of healthcare costs to providers, increase in operating costs, informative and knowledgeable customers; hospitals need branding to drive strategies, convey their expanding range of services, make an emotional connection with customers and create lasting relationships thereby generating profits.Companies are losing out because there is often little or no integration between Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) and marketing departments and their respective strategies. This misses brand building opportunities and may also confuse as well as disenfranchise company stakeholders.Unless CSR becomes central to the marketing director's agenda, it will not have the desired effect and can potentially create a backlash. The nature of the business -category, customers, competitors -should dictate how much and in which ways, a company should promote its CSR-related activities.Here, it lies the importance of developing a more strategic, distinct, sustainable and well defined brand platform. It is ultimately the hospital's brand and the customers' ability to trust that will aid in the decision-making process between competitive healthcare hospitals. Patient expectations and desires are changing, altering the competitive landscape. Employees are a hospital's most vital force and communication medium. Thus, the brand is the greatest asset for uniting employees around a singular culture and mission. This study highlights a conceptual framework that can be used for healthcare organizations to develop the revenues based on branding.
BackgroundDrug resistant tuberculosis (DR-TB) centers admit patients with DR-TB for initiation of treatment and thereby concentrate the patients under one setting. It becomes imperative to assess the compliance of DR-TB centres to national airborne infection control (AIC) guidelines and explore the provider perspectives into reasons for unsatisfactory compliance.MethodsThis mixed methods study (triangulation design) was carried out across all the six DR-TB centers of Karnataka state, India, between November 2016 and April 2017. Non-participant observation using a structured format was carried out at the DR-TB wards (n = 6), outpatient departments (n = 6), patient waiting areas outside outpatient departments (n = 6) and culture and drug susceptibility testing laboratories (n = 3). Structured interviews of admitted patients (n = 30) were done to assess the knowledge on cough hygiene and sputum disposal. Key informant interviews (KIIs) of health care providers (n = 20) were done. Manual descriptive content analysis was done to analyse the transcripts of KIIs.ResultsThe findings related to compliance in non-participant observation were corroborated by KIIs. All the laboratories were consistently implementing the AIC guidelines. Compliance to hand hygiene, wet mopping and ventilation measures were satisfactory in four or more DR-TB wards. The non-availability of N95 masks in wards as well as outpatient departments was staggering. Sputum disposal without prior disinfection and the lack of display materials on cough hygiene and patient education was common. Patient fast tracking in outpatient department waiting areas and visitor restrictions in wards were lacking. Trainings on AIC measures were uncommon. About half and one-third of patients admitted had satisfactory knowledge regarding sputum disposal and situations demanding mask respectively. The reasons for unsatisfactory compliance to AIC guidelines were poor coordination between programme and hospital authorities leading to lack of ownership; ineffective or non-existent infection control committees; vacant posts of medical officers; and attitudes of health care delivery staff.ConclusionCompliance with AIC guidelines in DR-TB centers of Karnataka was sub-optimal. The reasons identified require urgent attention of the programme managers and hospital authorities.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s13756-017-0270-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
India accounts for the highest number of incident tuberculosis (TB) cases globally. Hence, to impact the TB incidence world over, there is an urgent need to address and accelerate TB control activities in the country. Nearly, half of the TB patients first seek TB care in private sector. However, the participation of private practitioners (PPs) has been patchy in TB prevention and care and distrust exists between public and private sector. PPs usually have varied diagnostic and treatment practices that are inadequate and amplify the risk of drug resistance. Hence, their regulation and involvement as key stakeholders are important in TB prevention and care in India if we are to achieve TB control at global level. However, there remain certain barriers and gaps, which are preventing their upscaling. The current paper aims to discuss the status of private sector involvement in TB prevention and care in India. The paper also discusses the strategies and initiatives taken by the government in this regard as evidence shows that the involvement of private sector in co-opting directly observed treatment short-course (DOTS) helps to enhance case finding and treatment outcomes; it improves the accessibility of quality TB care with greater geographic coverage. Besides public-private mix, DOTS has been found more cost-effective and reduces financial burden of patients. The paper also offers to present some more solutions both at policy and program level for upscaling the engagement of PPs in the national TB control program.
Background Although well recognized for its scientific value, data sharing from clinical trials remains limited. Steps toward harmonization and standardization are increasing in various pockets of the global scientific community. This issue has gained salience during the COVID-19 pandemic. Even for agencies willing to share data, data exclusivity practices complicate matters; strict regulations by funders affect this even further. Finally, many low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) have weaker institutional mechanisms. This complex of factors hampers research and rapid response during public health emergencies. This drew our attention to the need for a review of the regulatory landscape governing clinical trial data sharing. Objective This review seeks to identify regulatory frameworks and policies that govern clinical trial data sharing and explore key elements of data-sharing mechanisms as outlined in existing regulatory documents. Following from, and based on, this empirical analysis of gaps in existing policy frameworks, we aimed to suggest focal areas for policy interventions on a systematic basis to facilitate clinical trial data sharing. Methods We followed the JBI scoping review approach. Our review covered electronic databases and relevant gray literature through a targeted web search. We included records (all publication types, except for conference abstracts) available in English that describe clinical trial data–sharing policies, guidelines, or standard operating procedures. Data extraction was performed independently by 2 authors, and findings were summarized using a narrative synthesis approach. Results We identified 4 articles and 13 policy documents; none originated from LMICs. Most (11/17, 65%) of the clinical trial agencies mandated a data-sharing agreement; 47% (8/17) of these policies required informed consent by trial participants; and 71% (12/17) outlined requirements for a data-sharing proposal review committee. Data-sharing policies have, a priori, milestone-based timelines when clinical trial data can be shared. We classify clinical trial agencies as following either controlled- or open-access data-sharing models. Incentives to promote data sharing and distinctions between mandated requirements and supportive requirements for informed consent during the data-sharing process remain gray areas, needing explication. To augment participant privacy and confidentiality, a neutral institutional mechanism to oversee dissemination of information from the appropriate data sets and more policy interventions led by LMICs to facilitate data sharing are strongly recommended. Conclusions Our review outlines the immediate need for developing a pragmatic data-sharing mechanism that aims to improve research and innovations as well as facilitate cross-border collaborations. Although a one-policy-fits-all approach would not account for regional and subnational legislation, we suggest that a focus on key elements of data-sharing mechanisms can be used to inform the development of flexible yet comprehensive data-sharing policies so that institutional mechanisms rather than disparate efforts guide data generation, which is the foundation of all scientific endeavor.
BackgroundIn India, the Revised National TB Control Programme (RNTCP) envisages initiation of TB treatment within seven days of diagnosis among smear-positive patients. After nearly two decades of RNTCP implementation, treatment delays are usually not expected.ObjectivesTo determine the proportion of sputum smear-positive TB patients who were initiated on treatment after seven days and their associated risk factors.MethodsThe study was conducted in Cuttack and Rayagada districts of Odisha. It was a retrospective cohort study that involves review of TB treatment registers and laboratory registers for 2013.ResultsAmong 1,800 pulmonary TB (PTB) patients, 1,074 (60%) had been initiated on treatment within seven days of diagnosis, 721 (40%) had been initiated on treatment more than seven days, and 354 (20%) had delays of more than 15 days. The mean duration between TB diagnosis and treatment initiation was 21 days with a range of 8–207 days (median = 14 days). Odds of treatment delay of more than seven days were 4.9 times (95% confidence interval [CI] 3.3-6.6) among those who had been previously treated, 6.2 times (95% CI 1.3-29.7) among those infected with HIV, and 1.8 times (95% CI 1.1-2.9) among those diagnosed outside district DMC.ConclusionDelay in initiation of TB treatment occurred in majority of the smear-positive patients. The RNTCP should focus on core areas of providing quality TB services with time-tested strategies. To have real-time monitoring mechanisms for diagnosed smear-positive TB patients is expected to be the way forward.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.