SummaryInefficient case finding is an important stumbling block to successful control of tuberculosis (TB). Multiple health seeking may account for delayed case finding. Health-seeking behaviour, health seeking delay, perceived causes, and perceived quality of care related to TB were studied in interviews with 319 sputum smear-positive TB patients. The patients were treated in 22 governmental health centres of Malabon, a municipality of Metro Manila, Philippines. Only 29% of the respondents had gone first to a health centre after onset of TB-related symptoms, and more than half (53%) had initially consulted a private doctor. A chest X-ray was obtained for nearly everyone (97%). Two thirds of the patients (66%) had received a prescription for drugs, and 29% had purchased and taken anti-TB drugs for at least three weeks before they came to a governmental health centre. Concerning community interactions, 36% said they knew at least one person who had been treated for TB without success. The health seeking delay after symptom onset was relatively short -64% of the respondents said they went to a health facility within 1 month. Case studies illustrate the rationale for health seeking and explain delayed initiation of appropriate treatment for many patients. Findings underscore the need for and indicate approaches to health communication for improved control of TB. Our findings from interview narratives also suggest that improved interpersonal skills of health centre staff and co-ordination between the private doctors and the health centres may substantially improve services for TB patients.keywords pulmonary tuberculosis, health seeking, health providers, perceived causes of TB, Philippines correspondence Christian Auer, Swiss Tropical Institute,

No abstract

No predictor of patient delay was found among the variables collected. For one fourth of the patients, the health system delay was longer than 7 weeks. General practitioners are commonly approached first, and they have to consider TB, also for patients not considered at high-risk for TB.

BackgroundEquity remains a priority in the international health development agenda. However, major inequities in vaccination coverage jeopardise the achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals. We aim at comprehensively describing how research has addressed equity issues related to vaccination.MethodsWe carried out an overview of systematic reviews (SRs) that explicitly explored the effects of interventions to improve vaccination in any context; for any vaccine and, in any language. We followed standard research synthesis methods to systematically search for SR, assess them for inclusion and extracting relevant data, particularly on vaccination related outcomes. To gather evidence on equity issues addressed in the SR, we used the PROGRESS-plus framework.FindingsOur search obtained 2,003 hits which resulted in 54 included SRs, published between 1994 and 2014. The quality of SRs was generally poor, with less than half complying with most of the quality criteria. Reported vaccines included, by order of frequency, influenza and Expanded Programme on Immunisation vaccines. The types of interventions more frequently reported were related to vaccination delivery strategies, financial support and information, education and communication. Most of the SRs suggested effects favouring intervention groups as opposed to comparison groups. The most frequently reported equity attribute was ‘place of residence’ and the least reported equity attributes were sexual orientation and religion. Very few estimates of effects actually measured differences or changes between groups having those attributes and all of them referred to the place of residence. No data was found about reducing equity gaps for vulnerable groups or minorities, or attributes such as sexual orientation, education or specific religious groups.ConclusionsAlthough research on vulnerable populations as a subgroup is abundant, it fails to report on the interventions that will actually reduce inequities and consider how redistribution of health care resources could shrink the gap between the privileged and most vulnerable groups including minorities. Research, if aiming at being responsive to global health policy trends, needs to report not only on specific attributes but also on how a better redistribution of health care resources could contribute to alleviating the unjust situation of the most vulnerable populations.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12939-017-0587-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Background Health information systems are crucial to provide data for decision-making and demand for data is constantly growing. However, the link between data and decisions is not always rational or linear and the management of data ends up overloading frontline health workers, which may compromise quality of healthcare delivery. Despite limited evidence, there is an increasing push for the digitalization of health information systems, which poses enormous challenges, particularly in remote, rural settings in low- and middle-income countries. Paper-based tools will continue to be used in combination with digital solutions and this calls for efforts to make them more responsive to local needs. Paper-based Health Information Systems in Comprehensive Care (PHISICC) is a transdisciplinary, multi-country research initiative to create and test innovative paper-based health information systems in three sub-Saharan African countries. Methods/Design The PHISICC initiative is being carried out in remote, rural settings in Côte d’Ivoire, Mozambique and Nigeria through partnership with ministries of health and research institutions. We began with research syntheses to acquire the most up-to-date knowledge on health information systems. These were coupled with fieldwork in the three countries to understand the current design, patterns and contexts of use, and healthcare worker perspectives. Frontline health workers, with designers and researchers, used co-creation methods to produce the new PHISICC tools. This suite of tools is being tested in the three countries in three cluster-randomized controlled trials. Throughout the project, we have engaged with a wide range of stakeholders and have maintained the highest scientific standards to ensure that results are relevant to the realities in the three countries. Discussion We have deployed a comprehensive research approach to ensure the robustness and future policy uptake of findings. Besides the innovative PHISICC paper-based tools, our process is in itself innovative. Rather than emphasizing the technical dimensions of data management, we focused instead on frontline health workers’ data use and decision-making. By tackling the whole scope of primary healthcare areas rather than a subset of them, we have developed an entirely new design and visual language for a suite of tools across healthcare areas. The initiative is being tested in remote, rural areas where the most vulnerable live.

IntroductionFront-line health workers in remote health facilities are the first contact of the formal health sector and are confronted with life-saving decisions. Health information systems (HIS) support the collection and use of health related data. However, HIS focus on reporting and are unfit to support decisions. Since data tools are paper-based in most primary healthcare settings, we have produced an innovative Paper-based Health Information System in Comprehensive Care (PHISICC) using a human-centred design approach. We are carrying out a cluster randomised controlled trial in three African countries to assess the effects of PHISICC compared with the current systems.Methods and analysisStudy areas are in rural zones of Côte d’Ivoire, Mozambique and Nigeria. Seventy health facilities in each country have been randomly allocated to using PHISICC tools or to continuing to use the regular HIS tools. We have randomly selected households in the catchment areas of each health facility to collect outcomes’ data (household surveys have been carried out in two of the three countries and the end-line data collection is planned for mid-2021). Primary outcomes include data quality and use, coverage of health services and health workers satisfaction; secondary outcomes are additional data quality and use parameters, childhood mortality and additional health workers and clients experience with the system. Just prior to the implementation of the trial, we had to relocate the study site in Mozambique due to unforeseen logistical issues. The effects of the intervention will be estimated using regression models and accounting for clustering using random effects.Ethics and disseminationEthics committees in Côte d’Ivoire, Mozambique and Nigeria approved the trials. We plan to disseminate our findings, data and research materials among researchers and policy-makers. We aim at having our findings included in systematic reviews on health systems interventions and future guidance development on HIS.Trial registration numberPACTR201904664660639; Pre-results.

Drug-resistant tuberculosis (DR-TB) is a global challenge and a major contributor of death from anti-microbial resistance. With the main aim to determine factors contributing to treatment outcomes observed among DR-TB patients in the countries in Eastern Europe and Central Asia (EECA), a multi-method study was conducted in: Azerbaijan, Belarus, Romania, Tajikistan and Ukraine. Both quantitative and qualitative methodologies were used for data collection and analysis. The quantitative approaches included a desk review of documents related to the DR-TB responses and an analysis of clinical records of DR-TB patients in selected health facilities of the five countries. Qualitative methods included in-depth interviews with national TB programme (NTP) managers, other healthcare providers and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) workers, as well as interviews and Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) with DR-TB patients. The desk review of 38 reports identified as the main challenges to address DR-TB financial and/or management issues and adverse events of the medicines. The most common recommendations related to treatment outcome focussed on general programme management, treatment regimen composition, clinical management and social support for the patients. In all the five countries the NTPs still have a vertical structure. Some integration into the primary health care system (PHC) already exists but further involvement of PHC facilities is feasible and recommended. Interviews with stakeholders indicated that alcoholism and homelessness and a lack of appropriate response to these issues remain as major challenges for a sub-set of patients. Civil society groups, NGOs and communities are substantially engaged in providing different services to DR-TB patients, especially in Ukraine, Romania and Tajikistan. Data from clinical records of 212 patients revealed that independent risk factors for unfavourable treatment outcome (death, loss to follow-up, failure) were culture-positivity at two months of treatment, history of treatment with second-line drugs and homelessness. More powerful, less toxic and shorter oral treatment regimens as well as comprehensive patient support are needed to improve treatment outcome of patients with DR-TB.

BackgroundHealth Information Systems are crucial to provide data for decision-making and data demands are constantly growing. However, the link between data and decisions is not always rational nor linear and the management of data ends up overloading frontline health workers, who may have to compromise the health care. Despite limited evidence, there is an increasing push for the digitalisation of Health Information Systems, which faces enormous challenges, particularly in remote, rural settings in low- and middle-income countries. Paper-based tools will continue to be used and this warrants efforts to make them more responsive to local needs. Paper Health Information Systems (PHISICC) is a transdisciplinary, multi-country research initiative to create and test innovative paper-based Health Information Systems in three Sub-Saharan African countries.MethodsThe PHISICC initiative is taking place in remote, rural settings, in Côte d’Ivoire, Mozambique and Nigeria, through partnership with Ministries of Health and research institutions. We began with research syntheses to acquire the most up to date knowledge on Health Information Systems. These were coupled with field work in the three countries to understand the current design, patterns and contexts of use, and health care worker perspectives. Frontline health workers, with designers and researchers, used co-creation methods to produce the new PHISICC tools. This suite of tools is being tested in the three countries. Throughout the project, we have engaged with a wide range of stakeholders and have kept the highest scientific standards to keep it relevant to health policy in each of the three countries.DiscussionWe have deployed a comprehensive research approach to ensure the robustness and future policy uptake of the finding. Beyond the resulting paper-based tool design innovations, our process itself was innovative. Rather than emphasizing the data management compliance aspects we focused instead on frontline health workers’ decision-making; by tackling the whole scope of health care areas in Primary Health Care rather than incremental improvement to existing tools, we developed an entirely new design approach and language for a suite of tools in Primary Health Care. The initiative is being tested in remote, rural areas where the most vulnerable live.